I can think of several but doesn't mean they are correct. One can believe they are in strategic alternative discussions that were depending on some type of data resolutions. I don't know but that is focus of yesterday's PR. There's also the possibility the company is going to have to run a larger/longer trial. Very real possibility. There's also the fear that the company may not have ANY great chances to raise money and this was as good as any. The fact is we have essentially the same people funding this company we've had all along. All they've done is get subgroup success and a diminishing share price for the investor. They don't have a big management team. They have a wealth of knowledge in Alkon and a lot of IP expertise but not much else. You are correct, if they don't have to have the money then no reason to do it. I'm not sure 20 million dollars we have with the NIH grant included would make it through the 2 years necessary, especially if the trial is larger or longer. I'm not sure anyone could say that with confidence. I'm not sure 1.65 is a bad price to get for a company that has traded below a buck most of the last 4 months. The company obviously likes to give out warrants to hopefully generate additional cash in the future. That's a reality we've known for years.
If you want to see something interesting, I followed TRIL as a "january effect" stock. Talk about a similar pattern...price increase based on nothing, regain listing, capital raise. Luckily for them the run on no real news has held.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
