News Focus
News Focus
icon url

austinmediainc

12/09/15 9:19 AM

#46810 RE: CherryTree1 #46807

I totally agree that the Ondra deal should have been terminated for the obvious conflict of interest, but as far as Freeh Group, I'd like to see the proof. It is very vaguely written.

The Board's understanding is that the Freeh Group is an affiliate of the Pepper Hamilton law firm, and there have been and are various connections and involvement of these entities and their personnel with companies who are competitors of NW Bio or adverse to NW Bio.

It's the boards understanding that my cousin's brother's girlfriend once shared a hot dog with a guy that met President Kennedy? The biotech world is pretty small and I'm sure many well regarded companies have worked with multiple companies competitors or whom that company may view as a competitor.

Also, I thought we had patents to protect the technology and manufacturing? Wouldn't any company be years, perhaps a decade behind after clinical trials if they did steal and move forward with NWBO technology?
icon url

Stillwell888

12/09/15 10:48 AM

#46819 RE: CherryTree1 #46807

In Senti's original post on this matter he says that Ondra advised Invesco Perpetual to oppose the BAE-EADS deal. One thing he forgot to mention is that NW worked at Invesco Perpetual at the time and guess who was the investment manager objecting to the deal? NW! Now that is not to say that he was not mislead by Ondra in regards to NWBO it is just that their relationship goes back to at least 2012.
icon url

Evaluate

12/09/15 6:21 PM

#46867 RE: CherryTree1 #46807

If this is indeed the case it will be very interesting to see what NW does now that he knows. His company has already put out a public statement yesterday saying the were in agreement with the actions NWBO has taken. --- CherryTree


Did NW put out a public statement ? (link?) Or did he reply to an individual by email?