To answer your last question first - yes, that is the protocol for the trial. While personally I suspect that the benefit could be quite obvious to a casual observer, I am not well-versed enough in HIV itself to know that with any certainty. I think your point is that if the drug works that well, it may not be so "blind" as we think, and they may have a good idea of what the data will look like when it comes back, thus impacting financing decisions now. I suspect that is the case to some degree, and the results from the open label arm probably reinforce that for them.
Also, I do think it's possible for the PE data to not be outstanding but the 25-week data great. I don't expect it, but it's possible. That said, I think stellar 25-week data - which is what we've seen thus far - evidences the efficacy enough that less conclusive PE data may not be as meaningful as it otherwise would be.
As for the dilution to come, I think we all agree that cash will be raised, but we're unsure of amounts and terms. Plug different numbers in for those, as well as SP, and you get different expected returns for buy in points both before and after the raise. Many here are of the opinion that they'd rather not miss the chance on the biggest upside, while you (and others, no doubt) are on the side of being willing to miss the biggest upside for the safest return. It's all good - different strokes for different folks. As long as we have all the facts right, that's all that matters.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
