InvestorsHub Logo

Protector

02/29/16 8:15 AM

#255639 RE: senrex #255631

senrex, oh that is very simple.

I am sure that the number that they are looking at will probably be MUCH higher then they anticipated and possibly that worries them because there must be an underlying reason.

What if that underlying reason is something that invalidates the SUNRISE data and whatever there plan was could be crossed.

I will not go as far as saying they may even play it, but they are talking to a community PPHM investors that, as we see here, do not always completely grasp what is going on and hence may be perceived as hostile and certainly in some cases emotional due to a 65% drop in PPHM PPS.

Still I concur that they didn't sound 'enthusiastic' (by the way every one can listen to the recording and make up there own mind) but they certainly didn't sound depressed either, more like totally out of words to explain the number (performance) of that CONTROL arm.

And you know what, the more the CTRL arm is exceptional the better in this stage. Suppose it shows 16 months for Doce alone then the FDA will accept that that is an anomaly and has massH posted then there is room to talk and negotiate.

nh

02/29/16 9:01 AM

#255649 RE: senrex #255631

Alternatively, though it might not have been a planned outcome, it may still end up being an unforeseen positive event, even though it is a sea change in what their future might have been. It now takes them out of the running as a 'go-it-alone' competitor to BP and places them in a position of potential partner / acquisition only, IMHO.