You have some knowledge of prior developments and there you have me at a disadvantage - I know nothing of the sort! :-) BUT I do know that this viricide stuff is a world changer - a sea change in medicine and if correct, big pharma should (!!) be all over it like flies on you know what!
I say 'should' and I think 5 big pharma interests qualifies as a sea change justifier. However, the lack of a deal makes me anxious, concerned and worried that maybe I'm missing something.
Historically, perhaps that's the way it's been done. But, I think we have to leave open the possibility that pharmas are willing to do deals differently now, especially in regards to groundbreaking new technologies like NNVC's.
If your conceptualization was the set-in-stone unwavering truth going forward for all pharma deals between large established companies and small developmental stage companies like NanoViricides, then it would call into question public statements from the company over the past several months which definitely imply otherwise.
On May 28th of this year, NNVC first announced being in "Discussions with Pharma about EKC Eye Drug Candidate"
And now, just last week, in the Fireside Chat #3 (for which the company filed an SEC 8-K document), the company characterized talks with two pharmas as follows:
"Two of the previously most interested pharmas had representatives in attendance for our talk. The tenor of our discussions have now heated up because of that presentation. Nothing like the fear of potentially losing a deal to spur people on!"
These statements definitely suggest that the company believes that deals are possible over the near term, and further could be taken to imply that the company is optimistic that such a pharma deal might actually be signed in the not-too-distant future.
I think the next few weeks / months will be VERY interesting for shareholders of this company. I'm hopeful that the patience that many of us have displayed will finally be rewarded, and handsomely.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
