I have always believed in the value of their SCIENCE—it’s the BUSINESS side of the house that has underperformed miserably, in my view. When you have principally-engaged professionals talking extensively about efficacy on social media—but then see what we witnessed here—there are only so many possibilities, and here are a few: (1) those individuals exaggerated their claims (but why would they do so knowingly, given that their professional reputations are on the line?—doesn’t seem likely), (2) the market didn’t (and still doesn’t) see the lucrative value that the company claims is there (perhaps a clear and compelling business plan that showed specific revenue streams, time to value, etc. might have been helpful here? Call me crazy!), and (3) the coordination of ALIGNED ACTIVITIES and messaging—internally (between the scientists and the business managers) and externally (between the company and its investors and other stakeholders) was woefully inadequate and poorly planned and/or executed.
Market Data 
Markets 
