vator,
You might want to rethink that comment about spoofing. There was a massive attack on the price as October 2015 call options were being targeted. Didn’t take too much thinking to figure out what was going on with that. Dr. Linda Liau spoke the day before and that presentation wasn’t published until 2016. That’s the presentation where Dr. Linda Liau said that apparently all patients were living longer which of course is good news for patients with a trial that has a crossover design but also problematic as far as finding a way to distinguish and validate benefit from both early treatment and late treatment which is why Dr. Liau said in the same presentation that there should be a way to measure treatment benefit. There was a way and that way turned out to be use of ECAs. The then present exceptions rule to adequate and well controlled trials allowed for this to be presented to FDA and others as the pathway forward because old measures had proven inadequate to measure treatment benefit because of treatment induced pseudoprogression. This change was accepted by all regulators as an “in theory” allowance because the trial design allowed for blinded changes to occur. These changes, however, still needed to be approved by the way they would be used “in practice” by FDA when final submissions were to be made.
Anyway, this was another example of good news being turned into bad by those motivated to do so and that was one of the biggest down days after the beginning of taking the price down from $12.54 by claiming the halt in screening was a sign that the trial was failing and Mr. Woodford announcing that he would no longer finance after November of that same year. So yes, they were working the price by false interpretation of news and comments about the trial. May 10th was just one more example in a long list of examples that point directly to this. Best wishes.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
