re: OilPatch -
I don't agree. Certainly to some extent responding to ridiculous arguments is a waste of breath and may only serve to suggest the arguments have some merit. However, there are plenty of arguments that have enough of a kernel of truth or believably to sway people and repetition, especially by multiple accounts, makes things more believable. That is why you don't see one political sign, you see dozens. You don't see one playbill, you see a wall of them.
In the 5 years I have been here I have watched a number of people succumb to the repetitive dross being served here and elsewhere. I know it can raise little specters of doubt in me and if nothing else depress my mood. Left unchecked it only grows in volume. And that goes for both those speaking for and against the company. I think plenty of damage is done by over-optimistic predictions that lack any factual foundation.
Sure, there are plenty of people who are just going to stubbornly hold and ignore the naysayers or logic things out but I think it still depresses the mood and dampens interest for more casual players. This is especially true when every event that is touted as the next possible reveal date comes and goes and people blame the company for not meeting targets the company never set.
The thing is, anyone who has really been looking at what is going on knows that the trial is a success and approval is coming. Everyone. We know this because the blinded data from almost 4 years ago tells us that. We know this because the company is setting things up for imminent approval and production. And most of all, we know this because management hasn't dumped their 130 MM shares of stock and bolted.
No one has adequately explained why the failure to release TLD signals less-than-expected results or a failed trial. If the trial had failed, the company would know and management would have dumped their shares and be long gone. Similarly, the doctors would know and would A) not be continuing to use DC-Vax in compassionate use and combo trials, and B) would not be silent or working diligently on a bogus paper.
So the trial didn't fail. And if the trial succeeded, then what possible reason does management have for deliberately withholding the results? They have nothing to gain by ''drawing things out' unless they have to. Whether they feel they need to make a case for marginal results or want to make stellar results unimpeachable, the decision to 'delay' release is not because they want to but because they feel they need to. All indications, including their ill-advised 2020 predictions, show that they are dying to tell everyone about their success. That they are for some reason intentionally stringing people along is a ludicrous idea.
