Why when the last BOD needed a win so badly did they not even peep about details of Exosomes.
While for me personally that win wouldn't have changed anything as long as the THEN current BoD didn't respond in defence to RONIN's letters, a win would have been good for CEO King and managers as well as for the confidence amongst employees and shareholders.
BUT...yes there is a BUT...announcing it to early, incomplete or with reserved terms such as 'preliminary','early results', etc, etc would not be a win because the PPHM shareholders has lived a pattern of good announcements followed by complete or temporary back-draws (e.g. H1/2012 followed by dose switching x months later, 70Mil$ backlog temporarily delay due to customer delays with FDA, etc).
Furthermore I did not 100% understand how PPHM looks at its PS-targeting related IP and Pipelines.
1) Do they sell Bavituximab and keep Betabodies? Will BP accept that?
2) At what extend is the liquid biopsy depending on the above IP or is it fully functional and protected by the patent PPHM got last year from UTSW?
3) Is it acceptable to separate biomarkers from the pipelines and has it economic viability on its own? Is the technology related to exosomes, because it says to be micro-vesicle based!
4) What about the imaging PNG!
5) Is full Acquisition & Merger on the table as Dr. Lias didn't exclude it without further comment in public intervieuws.
So you see, in a negotiation PPHM may need to concede IP for the main pipelines that ALSO is needed for the Exosome Liquid Biopsy. CAR-T doesn't make all this easier because there we are back to TARGETING and we enter the domain of Avid's new platform, which IMO is based on...YES...the SAME technology. But can they do that without paying licenses of PPHM doesn't own the IP anymore?
Suppose Exosome and targeting tests remain with Avid that pays licenses to, say a BP or other company, that bought the IP. Where is the BULK of the profits going? Avid's margins would be severely narrowed and shareholders would possibly see very small profits on large turn-over, nothing close to the 50+% potential Avid can operate in normal, non-investing, periods.
But AVID would have to invest. So its profits go into more factories and not to dividends whil the acquiring company gets licenses WITHOUT ANY RISK and pure profit after writing down the acquisition cost of those patents.
All that is the kind of things we must be considering and making sure that the NEW BoD doesn't make deals letting us shareholders a company that will make large turn-over, high-investments and low-profit margins the next 10 years.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
