Replies to post #362250 on Innovation Pharmaceuticals Inc (IPIX)

[sunspotter]

“is based on ongoing independent laboratory research being conducted by scientists at George Mason University (GMU)/National Center for Biodefense and Infectious Diseases (NCBID). “

Contrary to your assertion, that doesn’t mean that IPIX aren’t paying for the research.

It just means they don’t get to vet or otherwise influence the results or the publication that might ensue from the research they paid for.

There’s fairly standard language in that type of contract that still allows it to be described as independent.

[loanranger]

Thanks for that. So as I understand it your "re-iteration", by which I assume you mean interpretation, is that "independent laboratory research" means the Company hasn't paid for any of it and I can understand why you might think that.
Until recently I might have thought so, too. Then I ran into the phrase "independent Data Monitoring Committee" and was more than a little surprised to find that its members are paid by the Company. SOMEBODY has to pay them, of course. But it shed a new light on the term "independent" for me. Maybe it shouldn't have because as I recently posted the Company's financial statements are audited be an "Independent Public Accounting Firm" which is obviously paid by the Company for its services.

The recent 10Q shows that the Company's largest Operating Expense is for Research and Development without much detail to support the charges. It does say this:
"We anticipate that future budget expenditures will be approximately $10.6 million for the next 12 months, including approximately $8.3 million for clinical activities, supportive research, and drug product."
and this:
"The Company is collaborating with a Regional Biocontainment Laboratory researcher investigating further research opportunities with Brilacidin as a treatment for the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and other H-CoVs."

Supportive research is a nondescript catch-all....we don't know what's in it for the anticipated expense OR for those already incurred....and "collaborating" tells us nothing. If memory serves the initial announcement of the $35,000 payment to GMU was made by the recipient, not the Company.

IMO it's not safe to assume that because it was described as "independent laboratory research" isn't enough to conclude that "There has been no payment from IPIX to GMU for this broad-spectrum antiviral research."
Obviously that is possible and I can't show otherwise.


ps. For those that are sure to find fault:
Is the Company obligated to break down their R&D costs in detail? Technically no.
Should the Company provide more detail to their R&D expense? Of course, if only because it is the Company's largest Operating Expense by far.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1355250/000147793221003093/ipix_10q.htm