Frustrated, the links to Reuters are of no consequence and not a single link to a communication of PPHM or DIOS, any declaration of them or even the beginning of a conflict or legal action are existent or provided.
This is a FICTIONAL INVENTED SCANDAL STORY about PPHM, the DIOS story as you call it, of which I have PROVEN with another link (see below) that the story is invented and fabricated because it is based on a PPHM-DIOS contract being so said disclosed 5 minutes before the close of MAY 31th 2007, the close that is key to make the Russel, in order to lift the PPHM PPS above 1.40$ to enter the Russel.
COUNTER PROVE that the story only holds because the board is misinformed on the dates of disclosure. The so said sudden information of MAY 31th 2007 at 3:55PM was not sudden at all but known and in the public on MAY 1st 2007 - 30 DAYS BEFORE THE RUSSEL DATE LINE.
That kills the core of the DIOS SCANDAL theory and all the rest that is build on it. The fact that the article mentioned details, that Reuters for some reason choose to publish it that day and time are of no consequence since PPHM does not decide when Reuters publishes data.
Furthermore for all we know the contract didn't come into place after the 1st of MAY for whatever reason, possibly even the disclosure of the potential deal itself by the provide link of May 1st, 2007.
DIOS may well have tried to force something by leaking terms to Reuters. There is NOT THE BEGINNING OF PROVE that PPHM is in ANY WAY responsible for the Reuters articles and the information was clearly in the public 30 days before. So all Russel related explanations are void or at the best disproved speculations or assumptions!
The Peregrine Financials article that harmed our Peregrine Pharmaceuticals PPHM PPS was also not the work of PPHM (in that case the editor apologised but we took the PPS beat). So who knows what happened with Reuters. The fact that there is no SEC listing or CT Order or any communication about a DIOS deal by PPHM proves that there must for sure not have been anything final. PPHM would have NO reason to back-out of a DIOS deal, if it ever existed, and we would have seen the revenue in the quarterly reports, which we did not. And WHO manufactures the antibodies for DIOS now then or do they not have them produced AT ALL? What if they ran in a last minute patent problem or any other situation, financial for instance, that would not allow DIOS to enter the contract?
I am under the impression that with keeping this FALSIFIED STORY alive attempts are made to harm PPHM or at least one or more of it's board members, certainly now that information and prove have been provided that the information that PPHM would have signed a contract (or intended to) with DIOS was not NEW on the Russel close of MAY 31, 2007 at 3:55PM but was made public, and available to the public, on May 1th, 2007, or 30 days before.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
