Replies to post #50531 on Cytogenix (fka CYGX)

[nearlynapping]

JJ, that is just your speculation about why simplivir has been on hold, or dead in the water, for several years. According to LW, the reason has nothing to do with synDNA. Could you be wrong??

Also, the most important question that no one seems to be able to answer, and that maybe you could ask at the shareholder meeting, deals with the patentability of synDNA as well as whether there are other people doing essentially the same thing that CYGX claims is so novel.

[kobisan]

Unrealistic expectations, JJ?

I've been an investor for 8 1/2 years and I've seen the IND for Simplivir pushed back several years already. When the PRs about an IND for CY301 first came out, there was no talk about how the product wouldn't be viable because of the high cost of DNA plasmid. That story came out some time after synDNA was developed.

If it weren't for synDNA, this company would be toast. It's the only reason why I'm still invested in CYGX. So let's be realistic, JJ, and admit that the only thing that's going to make money for CYGX in the near future is licensing and sales of synDNA. CYGX needs to concentrate on capturing as much market share for DNA plasmid mfg as they can through partnerships with other companies. Contracts with the govt would be a good thing too.