News Focus
News Focus
icon url

biosectinvestor

11/20/25 7:07 AM

#798636 RE: vator #798633

The delays have nothing to do with this issue. You and he both understand the real situation, yet you continue posting here as if you’re “invested,” despite having an entire financial world to choose from. That is what makes no sense. No one trashes their own investment and its shareholders expecting the price to rise.

As for “executive experience,” that has nothing to do with the basic need for authorized shares to keep a prerevenue company solvent. The choice here is straightforward and rational, and the company’s leadership has far more experience than the people criticizing them.

When a company exhausts its authorized shares, it destroys shareholder value—full stop. Anyone arguing that a prerevenue biotech should somehow operate without the ability to raise capital is not acting in shareholders’ interests. These narratives almost always come from vulture investors who try to herd retail investors into voting against their own interests using emotional, misleading arguments.

And that is exactly what we’re seeing right now: an attempt to push retail into a fundamentally destructive vote because destroying companies is easy profit for vultures.
icon url

manibiotech

11/20/25 7:14 AM

#798637 RE: vator #798633

You are absolutely right 
icon url

GoodGuyBill

11/20/25 2:15 PM

#798806 RE: vator #798633

And as much as you disagree, Biosect was right about you and others. You've been here for 10 years, right, hating management every hour.

Have I owned a biotech stock and ever decided it was time for me to move on? Sure. Sometimes a company is not right for you, or you don't have the patience or you do not agree with management. That's fine.

Did I then spend my time bashing management? No. I typically sold and moved on. In some instances I regretted that and in some I was happy I did move on.
I've never ridden a company to oblivion. So that I could call other shareholders names. THAT makes zero sense.
THAT is something that is bizarre. Not that shareholders want to preserve their holdings by supporting a CEO who got a company through difficult circumstances and who needs more shares to keep things going.