Yes, the patents do lend credibility. However, peer reviewed publications are better. I have a few patents and know how carelessly patent office approves them. That would not be the case with NNVC patents because this is very unique technology and nobody else could come close to filing a similar patent. Still having a patent does not mean that the technology is a viable one. Patent office approval in no way even implies that the technology will work.
Peer reviewed publications in a reputed journal is a different matter. Such a publication means that people who are knowledgeable have read the publication and agree with the methods and conclusions with the expectation that the authors are truthful. That still does not mean that the technology will work. However, it does mean that the peers have reviewed the methods used and agree with them. Look at the results published by NNVC. Nowhere I have seen how many animals were tested and how many confirmed the results shown. A paper giving such a result would never get published. That is why publication in a peer reviewed reputable journal gives the results credibility.
We need credibility for this stock to get it moving.
Another factor that I am not happy with is their reluctance to raise and spend money. Unless you spend money you cannot get results. We need quick results.
I am unhappy because the company has until now spent about $12 million in research. Their market cap is around $150 million. That means that when the company spends $1 their market value goes up by $10. Where can you ever get such a return? So I would say every year raise $10 million from stock sales and raise your market cap by $100.
This analysis is indicative of course. What they should really do is:
Announce results, stock price goes up, raise money, spend money wisely,
Repeat
If they do this continuously we will see price go up much faster.
There are a few other matters that I need to discuss. Seymore seems open to talking on phone. I will definitely call him next week.
