Replies to post #61512 on Biotech Values

[quantumdot]

MNTA - "It seems to me if the shares are still held by the limited partners they would have the same interest in knowing about their investments. So I would look for another explanation."

I agree. I don't think Dew's rationale for this board resignation passes the smell test. The first thing I thought of was that the LPs may be far more inclined to want to take both sides of the trade (particularly as the market cap continues to climb) and if they did go short it would probably be something he would be expected (obligated) to convey to the board if he was still on it!

On the other hand, the delayed resignation (not until June) suggests that there may not be any trading/oversight reason and that we are all over analyzing.

[mouton29]

<<It seems to me if the shares are still held by the limited partners they would have the same interest in knowing about their investments. So I would look for another explanation>>

I don't think so. If MVM is like private equity funds I am familiar with, once the shares are distributed to the LP's the fund does not know and does not t want to know what the investors are doing with the shares. Among other things, assuming the fund manager gets the usual 20% carried interest, that would typically be calculated based on the value on the date of distribution. Subsequent changes in market value are solely for the account of the LP and the manager does not share in the gains or suffer the losses.