InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

Bob_LobLaw

02/09/21 6:12 PM

#353818 RE: pqr #353817

The longer this goes, the more investors will expect out of the next catalyst/communication. If we go 5-6 months and get a PR stating they are still working on X, Y & Z but still not deliver TLD and publication, I think we would see a market selloff because it would start to smell rancid. Previous premature TLD announcements aren't helping the cause. Please get us the TLD and journal publication. Do not give us any BS that analysts are still working the data.
icon url

Gus McCrae

02/09/21 7:46 PM

#353832 RE: pqr #353817

pqr, I respectfully disagree with you. As for their securities counsel, and I'm assuming you mean Gibson Dunn, rather than LG, what they would "sign off" on and what they wouldn't is totally irrelevant. I can assure you that if LP wanted to issue a letter to shareholders as I generally described, she most certainly could have, and Gibson Dunn would have been more than happy to assist in that endeavor.

Look, I don't need a letter. But I'm not the normal retail investor, either. I recognize that they have done a terrible job in the past of updating shareholders and meeting timelines that they themselves established. So I don't think it's too much to ask for them to be considerate to their largely retail shareholder base by providing some kind of an update, even if it's just to say we remember you guys and we're working hard. It's cool if you disagree and think a letter or some other form of communication isn't necessary or appropriate. Reasonable people can disagree on this subject. I understand why they haven't communicated since the Oct. 5 press release (other than to certain individual shareholders like the whole December warrant extension debacle), I just don't agree with that decision.