Ombowstring,
Yes, I recall Neuro's post, and I believe I responded to it. The comment is certainly true with respect to mergers, acquisition, and financing. It probably also means that the deals that any company can command now is not as rich as it was last year. But the comment is not true across the board for all company licensing and partnering agreements. Remember, there are few companies that are in Cortex's position with very positive phase 2 data, multiple families of highly promising compounds with potential in several underserviced indications.
As the news articles continually point out, the big pharmas of the world desperately need the small, innovative biotechs to refill their pipelines, and there is significant competition for proven compounds.
Maybe I'm living in fanasyland, but I see more than one company wanting what Cortex has. The COR market capitalization is at a level where a lowball buyout offer from one may gain traction. If I were one of the suitors, why would I risk losing some much needed major, longterm revenue just to save a bit of pocket change? Besides, if I expected positive results, why would I even squeeze Cortex by negotiating a deal that makes it difficult for Cortex to perform. If I were the BP, I'd be generous with the upfront and milestone payments, and negotiate hard on the sharing of revenue from eventual sales. Such a deal (with big upfronts and milestone payments) is what Cortex needs, and would allow them to bootstrap their way forward in other indications.
Sorry for the rambling, but I think some of these statements have been misinterpreted.
Thanks,
Karl
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
