It hadn't occured to me that the large $ movement to Cognate could be a defensive stance like the positioning of patents in trusted private parties hands. I just hope that is not the case. It makes total sense, except that I don't think they could get away with that, so I don't think they would risk it.
I'm not trying to talk anyone else into ignoring the questionable looking dealings with Cognate, I am just saying that I don't know enough to say anything is really out of order. I feel I do know enough at this point to feel ok about the general idea of LP being in charge of both companies. It actually makes total sense to me at this point. And I know that there are possible explanations for some of the big $ movement. Why that wouldn't be more above board... that is hard to explain. Many write such things off as the need to be secretive to not effect the trial. I think there is more truth in that than many others allow... but big $ movement to Cognate... I do have some trouble understanding why infastructure spending would need to be secretive.
Maybe your right about them protecting the $. Or maybe they don't want to get into a discussion about why they would spend so much money on mfg development and or facilities acquisitions and development because the key reasons have to do with their perceived odds of success, which includes things they are not supposed to talk about. But that is reaching, I admit.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
