Replies to post #213790 on Avid Bioservices Inc (CDMO)

[BioBS2012]

excuse me, folks. it's not only stopek as an author. joe shan is there, too, so don't make it sound like pphm didn't know this was coming today.

and it should be PR'd. it's one thing to release info that says a single arm P1 had good results. it's an entirely different can of worms when that study has been peer-reviewed and been published by impartial potential critics.

as far as CA stuff goes, it is utterly ridiculous to suppress news which validates pphm's claims about the effectiveness of their mab. Confirmation of efficacy can ONLY help pphm's case that pphm was damaged by CSM's confusing actions.

What part of early view versus official publication do you not understand. it will be PR'd once officially published.
Yes I spoke to IR ;-)

[asmarterwookie]

honest et al....after private conversations I want to CLARIFY and HAMMER HOME....The CA does NOT effect the release of news except in the case of the CA itself. Any and ALL material information will be PRd according to SEC rules and regs. It was also noted, as in the case of the liver data that NOTHING changed from the previous info, hence no PR. "Strategic" reasons will effect the release of what we may see as material info but the SEC rules and regs do not. "Strategic" regarding data due to upcoming conferences and or publications.

Sunrise Trial enrollment info is also "strategic" in nature.

It seems a like a very fine line but material is material is material but bound to be interpreted by us.


Just look at the facts of "missing" PRs. Betabodies Patent, Liver Presentation...breast is very questionable as material because as stated...PEER REVIEWED does seem to be a MATERIAL EVENT in the CERTIFICATION of Bavituximabs MOA and actual effectiveness.

I'm trying to understand all this as much as anyone but it is what it is.
Take it for what it's worth.

wook