MNTA – You’re the only one so far who ascribes a higher valuation to case 3 than to case 2. I understand your logic: case 3 is indeterminate while case 2 arguably justifies downgrading the underlying value of MNTA’s technology.
On the other hand, case 2 allows MNTA to begin to have some money coming in from Lovenox royalties, and this has considerable value in its own right. All told, I think case 2 is better for the share price during the period in question (roughly 9-12 months from now), although one could make a case that case 3 might be better for the share price several years out.
“The efficient-market hypothesis may be
the foremost piece of B.S. ever promulgated
in any area of human knowledge!”