Same deal for RPRX, which is fundamentally why some of us have no patience with the unbalanced expressions of skepticism from our friends Dew, Thomas, Quantumdot and even Clark. Note the vital word "unbalanced."
As I said in a different way on the RPRX board, it is not that the view is unbalanced - it is that our conversation is focused, as I suggest that it should be, on those things not in plain sight. The positives in stocks are inevitably well publicized and therefore the conversations are, after a brief discussion, not novel and die out. But the hidden items, such as they might be, take time and discussion to flesh out.
Very simple
And PS - I've acknowledge most (all?) of your positive assessments are reasonable given the public facts, but with the caveat that you need to know there are no hidden landmines.
