Sukus - Now, I understand. I only access this site via tablet. I am unable to view it here.
Can you post the exact verbiabe? Sorry for the trouble, but I am quite curious. It is baffling to me that people can’t see what is going on from a Marketing perspective. Consider it a three legged table.
First, despite not presenting any new Congress information for like 2 or 3 years, LL has actually provided a heck of a lot of peer reviewed content at various institutions and CME events. The scientific strategy for statistical analysis, data base construction, and a large volume of actual clinical data inclusive of combo patient cases and no less than 5 actual live responders. Meanwhile, a peer reviewed publication or three gets submitted to a top tier journal.
Next, you have the Unbranded, disease and mechanism of disease work, alongside pipeline forward looking statements in booth and in other venue. Then a shift towards separation of disease materials from other material in space (at congress) and time (full page, quarter page advertisement). The unbranded advertisement lists claims that if directly attributed to a branded product would be efficacy, safety, durability, and a suggestion of approval, but alas it is unbranded.
Then, a Branded campaign of DCVax (R) with only disease and mechanism. No opportunity for contiguous link to Unbranded campaign as booth gets removed from congress. Unbranded remains in IBTA print separated from Branded in ABTA program and at SNO. Where else will Branding be employed? Oh, yea in the updated Franhoufer PR from 2012.
Then comes Mernix. In which bucket does that one fall?
This is becoming from the land of sky blue waters…
Fully Kroisened, from White Mountain Springs and Chippewa Falls.
Here is to good friends, tonight is kind of special!
