You’re wrong. In fact the company observed the embargo the entire time. They never directly released the results and no employee released the results or spoke to the press about the results, and they did not PR the results.
The presentations were hosted on third-party websites, not the company’s websites. You can try to claim, well, that’s just a “technicality”… no, it’s a policy, and they observed the policy of that other party and therefore continued also to be following their own policy.
Nowhere can you point to a communication from the company that says the outcome of the Phase 3, the endpoints and the result. This is not the first time we have had this discussion.
It is not a “loophole”, it is the policy, period. Just because people don’t understand the complexity of policies or that there are ways to utilize them for beneficial purposes, it doesn’t make them irrelevant or violate the fact that the company never released any data itself or from any employees. This has a particular impact as no legitimate journalists, not counting a certain person as a legitimate journalist, reported the results because the company would not have discussed or confirmed anything. They were under embargo, is all they could say.
You know this. This is reality. Trying to manufacture a new reality is not useful by claiming the presentation was “just a loophole” doesn’t change actual facts. The company never released any data therefore stopping broad coverage of their “results”. They observed the embargo strictly, and continue to do so.
I own NWBO. My posts on iHub are always posted expressly as just my humble opinion (IMHO) and none are advice, just my opinion. I am NOT a financial advisor, and it is assumed that everyone is responsible for their own due diligence.
AI
