InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 30
Posts 4143
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/25/2007

Re: DewDiligence post# 18616

Tuesday, 03/31/2009 8:14:06 PM

Tuesday, March 31, 2009 8:14:06 PM

Post# of 19309
Dew,

If I remember correctly, you intially stated that the for cause comment was something GTCB either hid or didn't mention, when the reality was they did.

Second, the posters I have called liars, actually did lie. Here is one example. Remember a poster who said Ovation dropped GTCB. I said it was a lie since Ovation hadn't dropped GTCB so I asked him to rescind the statement. The poster refused so I called him a liar. Do you think it was a lie? Another was the whole Jesse saga, when I accurately posted major contradictions (lies) in his comments. Since you like to cast aspersions, why don't you list all the posters I have called lies and explained where I was wrong?

Third, GTCB stated many times that LEO said there was no problem with safety or efficacy regarding rATIII. It was my OPINION that GTCB was accurately reporting what LEO said. It is my OPINION that you seem to think this was not true since you just stated you haven't seen anything from LEO. IN my OPINION that makes it seem like you think GTCB is lying.

Third, funny how you accuse me of having a problem with english, when you obviously have one. Great, it is your OPINION that LEO knows rATIII doesn't work in DIC. Are you happy? In my OPINION, this is more non-sense from you and another indication of your everything negative about GTCB. You don't have a freaking clue how many patients had made it through the DIC trial. You don't have a clue how many patinets it woudl tkae for LEO to get even a hint that rATII wasn't working. Yet you stated you THINK that LEO knows rATIII didn't work.

Fourth, here is my explanation once again for you. It was becoming obvious to LEO that the DIC trials would take a lot more cash and a lot longer to complete than they thought. Even if the data were good there was no guarantee it would be successful in phase III and that would be even more expensive. In addition, they would have had to pay GTCB milestones for the phase II trial. LEO decide to drop the project to avoid cost and told GTCB they were reprioritizing. They also filed a for cause suit to cover their butts legally since they knew they didn't have leg to stand on. LEO figured they could force GTCB's hand by delaying the transfer and get out of paying a penalty. See, this doesn't require any lying by anyone.

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.