Let me make sure I understand you. The company has created not one, but TWO, falsified launch plans for bavituximab and urged their own legal counsel to use them as evidence in order to try to get more money? Because I'm sure the dates are just randomly thrown out there. They probably don't have to explain why there would be two launch scenarios a year apart. You are a LOT smarter than that to think the company would fraudulently administer a fake conservative report to maximize damages in the middle of a class action trial.
Why does everyone think that a Q1 2017 launch is so crazy!? It's reality and it's not a bad thing. Enrollment is scheduled to complete December 2015, 2nd interim look in March-ish 2016, full data set at ASCO 2016, FDA approval in Q1 2017. The FDA has 60 days after submission to "accept the BLA submission and priority review sets a PDUFA date out 6 month later Why is that such a crazy assumption around these parts?
The real question is whether or not a partner will emerge to help advance the other indications prior to then. If not, it's going to be a long road down. I think we'll get one. Hell, it's now a fact and evidence in the CSM trial that Abbvie gave PPHM a term sheet with potential milestones just under $2B. Now that we have a more well understood MOA and betabodies patented, I'd think the value should be at least the same. The fact that PPHM has done no financing keeps me optimistic. I was expecting one prior to last fiscal quarter end. They'll either need a partner with up-front money or another round of financing to keep the going concern away by April 30. Tick Tock. Have a nice weekend.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
