Replies to post #227950 on Innovation Pharmaceuticals Inc (IPIX)

[loanranger]

re: Question #1, do you think the short and distort tactic was and still is being used in IPIX?

That's two questions.
Answer #1: Yes.
Answer #2: No.

See how easy it is to answer a direct question with a direct answer?
If only you had done that here...
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=140670192
...and when I had to ask it again here...
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=140710366
...we wouldn't be here talking about nonsense like who doesn't report to who and I wouldn't have to defend myself for asking a relevant question.

As you say in every message,
"FUD - Fear, uncertainty and doubt, is generally a strategic attempt to influence perception by disseminating negative and dubious or false information."
And sometimes the truth hurts but it still should be told...even when it too creates fear, uncertainty and doubt.

[loanranger]

No question follows:

I asked....
"Do the purported "constant short and distort attacks" explain why the share price continued downward in spite of today's press release?" on the day that IPIX reported some results on the efficacy of B-OM, asserting that "The commercial potential for Brilacidin-OM in HNC is substantial and untapped".
It wasn't "a strategic attempt to influence perception by disseminating negative and dubious or false information". It was a serious question about what seemed to be a counter-intuitive market response to good news.

Yesterday's market response seemed similarly counter-intuitive. The Balance Sheet and some of the text in the 10-Q addressed some fairly serious questions about the company's liquidity and one of its drugs yet the share price moved up a bit.
Some may have liked the filing overall, but...
The S-3 issue was raised in some detail, is complicated and still open in at least one critical respect, but this simple non-scientist couldn't help but notice that there was a change in presentation involving Prurisol that may speak to the company's actual assessment of it even in the purported absence of data.

The 12/31 10-Q Clinical Development Programs Section lists the company's compounds like this:
Prurisol
Brilacidin
Kevetrin

The same Section in yesterday's 10-Q lists them like this:
Brilacidin
Kevetrin
Prurisol

I'm not making any BIG claim about that re-sequencing and I have no question to ask you about it, but it's a simple fact and there was no obvious explanation for it. I don't think that it could be called FUD to point that out, but that's not my assessment to make.
Prurisol actually received fewer mentions than Kevetrin in this 10-Q and fewer mentions than it received in the prior 10-Q. Too simplistic? Of course it is. FUD? Can't be....it's true.


"Question #1, do you think the short and distort tactic was and still is being used in IPIX?"
Attributing any of the multi-year downward drift of IPIX's share price to "the short and distort tactic" seems silly and unsupportable to me. I think that the problem was and still is a gradual recognition of the truth.

Next question?