Replies to post #15395 on GTC Biotherapeutics (fka GTCB)

[jessellivermore]

The Blame Game.....

.... Don't blame you, don't blame me, blame that fellow behind the tree.

Reality sucks, reality is GTC has a $30 mil plus yearly cash burn, which DD has recently gone on record saying he thinks it would be hard to significantly lower. So 'stockdak' what exactly is it they should have done to come up with the $150 mil they have needed to fund the operation over the period the dilutions took place? When and how did they "not get cash, when cash was available"?

You say "Cox and company have a long history of regulatory blunders". The only regulatory hitch I remember is the EMEA neg opinion in 2006 when the EMEA changed the rules on GTC by excluding the childbirth cases. The company handled the matter promptly and the EMEA reversed the decision. If you want to be angry at someone, why not the innefficient, BP serving, regulatory agencies. In a time when medical knowledge is global why should there be no reciprocity between the European and the US drug regulators. Because GTC has to repeat most of its effort and more importantly kill time while the regulators make up their minds, this means GTC needs more money.

GTC's management has made mistakes. Clearly the AT-HD market has been grossly overestimated. As far as GTC is concerned this is about a $5-7.5 mil/year error, at this stage fairly serious. On this iHUB board we have several people who have professional level knowledge in this area and none of us anticipated this.

The LEO partnership looks like a disaster, but unless LEO was lying (read the CEO's comments) they seemed fully committed to the partnership. There is no transparency Re the DIC indication, LEO's abandonment suggest there may be a problem, but LFB's willingness to continue suggests maybe not. I posted earlier that in a phone conversation I had with "Rustyboy" a few days ago he was told by GTC's management that LEO's status as a "charitable' organization, or something like that entered into their decision. I do not understand how, but perhaps it might have prevented them from holding shares in a publicly held company.

Nice to see you are leaving the company in "some style" voting your shares.... Then dumping them.