RM, we had that discussion. Expansion of the PPHM BoD board which currently has 2 internal and 2 external members is INDEED a good thing provided that:
1) The new members cannot be a cause of leak directly in hostile or competition sources.
2) The new BoD composition GUARANTEES that the current 4 have the power to maintain (renew) the poison pill next time it expires).
3) That if the conditions allowing the BoD to trigger the poison pill are met, and that as part of a hostile acquisition by one or a group of parties, they do effectively trigger it.
4) That the new board members cannot by their voting power move PPHM in a scenario of indirect disabling of the poison pill such as taking a loan with loan term forbidding the issuing of PPHM common shares - which indirectly makes the poison pill triggering impossible because it is based on the issuing of shares to dilute the hostile parties and enforce all other shareholders.
5) That such new BoD members see the total value of Bavituximab and do not steer the ship to a quick two years in, big bonus, and get out.
I have pleaded for Dr. Brekken or Dr. Antonia or Dr. Bridge etc because we need a Scientist/Biologist as counter weight/echo board of CEO Kings views in the BoD that can currently not be challenged by the 3 legal members.
And Dr. Garnick because we need someone with a large directory of contacts and profound knowledge of the strategies in drug land.
Bringing this BoD to 6 members in this way, given Brekken and Garnick are invested, and actually each new BoD member would get invested by the option bonuses, would be a good first step.
AIMO
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
