Replies to post #2018 on Galectin Therapeutics Inc. (GALT)

[thefamilyman]

I was going to take your advice and listen to it but the presentation is still not up on the company website. Do you by any chance have a link? TIA

Interesting comments made by Czirr during the Q&A after his LD Micro presentation yesterday.

I would prefer that you listen and draw your own conclusions but here is what he said (at least what I heard):

-The reason for the Cohort 2 webinar and data release was thet GALT was trying to educate shareholders about NASH and the way trials are conducted; when they posted the data others with a different agenda jumped on it as a way of crushing the stock.
-They think the lawsuits have no merit as they mention 4 promotors and 3 of them were never paid by GALT

There were other comments as well, like I said, draw your own conclusions. Czirr is a better presenter than Traber and should be the point person for them going forward.

Also, interesting change in the BOD today making Mark Rubin the lead of the independent directors, which is everyone other than Czirr and Traber. Maybe this makes GALT a 3 headed leadership group going forward (maybe not).
- biotech2010

[thefamilyman]

I agree that Czirr is a better presenter and I like the elevated role for Mark Rubin. It was a good presentation that provided several reasons to be optimistic and supported my decision to continue with this investment.

However, I disagree with Czirr's assertion that one newsletter writer was the reason for the loss of 80% of our market cap last year. (Since it was brought up in the Q&A, I feel I need to respond to Czirr's comments.) I remember that morning very well and I did not learn anything that morning from a newsletter writer. But I do remember looking at that presentation and realizing how screwed I was.

Based on the high expectations we all had for Cohort 2 under the original protocol, many of us had overloaded on the stock and even purchased call options. Changing the protocol meant that we could no longer see any sort of positive "progression" from the Cohort 1 results and our share price tanked. (I for one would not have overloaded or bought call options had I known of the change in protocol.) Yes that newsletter writer undoubtedly helped things along, but he was not the only reason for the initial decline and is certainly not responsible for the continued depression of our share price a year after the fact.

For a long time I thought that they had not disclosed the change in protocol for Cohort 2. Recently, it was pointed out that the change in protocol could have been "deduced" from information in a slide in one of the presentations so I guess the change was technically disclosed. However, I will not be investing additional capital in GALT right now because I don't want to worry that I didn't dissect their slides well enough to insure that I am fully informed.

The science is still strong (actually it's even stronger) so why hasn't the share price recovered. I continue to believe that the fact that GALT's share price dropped so far and has not recovered is because the investing public has lost confidence in this management team. Everybody who was invested in GALT previously was negatively affected by the Cohort 2 fiasco and many (or most) feel that management was responsible. We need those investors to come back and they have not. Before you can fix a problem you have to first be willing to admit that there is a problem.

The fact that management wants to place all the blame for the Cohort 2 disaster on one newsletter writer instead of accepting at least some responsibility themselves tells me that apparently, there is still a problem. Management needs to get professional help to rebuild/regain the confidence of the investment community.

Perhaps management is not being allowed to do any kind of mea culpa due to the on-going lawsuit? Perhaps once the lawsuit is history we will see a real effort to rebuild investor confidence in our management team; an effort that would include a commitment to full and more transparent disclosure in the future.

Interesting comments made by Czirr during the Q&A after his LD Micro presentation yesterday.

I would prefer that you listen and draw your own conclusions but here is what he said (at least what I heard):

-The reason for the Cohort 2 webinar and data release was thet GALT was trying to educate shareholders about NASH and the way trials are conducted; when they posted the data others with a different agenda jumped on it as a way of crushing the stock.
-They think the lawsuits have no merit as they mention 4 promotors and 3 of them were never paid by GALT

There were other comments as well, like I said, draw your own conclusions. Czirr is a better presenter than Traber and should be the point person for them going forward.

Also, interesting change in the BOD today making Mark Rubin the lead of the independent directors, which is everyone other than Czirr and Traber. Maybe this makes GALT a 3 headed leadership group going forward (maybe not).
- biotech2010