Replies to post #22670 on RespireRx Pharmaceuticals Inc (fka RSPI)

[iggs]

"My stated timeframe was and is January. If we don't hear something by month's end, I'll get nervous--alright, I'm already nervous, then I'll escalate. "

Neuro:

Given the cash position, there is no magic or very much of a difference between the last day of Jan and the first day of Feb.

I think COR should sell itself or merge with a company that can unlock the value of ampakines. I would prefer a merger whereby current shareholders have a chance of realizing the upside that they deserve. If the company fails to get something done here, they, as we all know, are done. Varney's big splash as CEO turns into a drop of dew before sunrise.

[RBlatch]

"As to the carping about radio silence: I'm still baffled by complaints that Cortex isn't keeping people up to date on the state of negotiations. Just absurd. If someone can give an example of a company which does provide play-by-play, status reports on partnering negotiations, let me know. My stated timeframe was and is January. If we don't hear something by month's end, I'll get nervous--alright, I'm already nervous, then I'll escalate. But one thing I won't do is question whether Cortex management takes this situation and their responsibility to shareholders seriously. That is complete BS."

Neuro. The only thing that is complete BS around here is your lack of criticism of a company that certainly deserves its fair share.

Your white knight position of protector of all things negative cast towards Cortex or its management becomes highly suspicious. I realize that you must maintain a "working relationship" with those management peoples inside of the companys that you "report" on, but at what point does it knowingly or unknowingly sway your objectivity?

I appreciate your informative contributions to this message board, however, your constant, unrelenting defense of management becomes hollow in light of the situation before us.

And I still stand by my statemnt below that Cortex could easily issue a press release "generally" (I repeat - generally) updating where any negotiations stand without breaking any laws or comprimising their negotiating positions. If they cared about their shareholders, they would keep them more informed and not hide behind laws that were not intended to be hidden behind.

"They could very easily issue a press release giving an update on where money matters stand and {b}generally where any negotiqations stand for RD."

I wish you a prosperous new year.

Cordially,
RBlatch

[haysaw]

<<But one thing I won't do is question whether Cortex management takes this situation and their responsibility to shareholders seriously>>

How does one 'not' question them based on 3 year performance? Had Cortex management developed a strategy/plan that didn't result in them always running to the financing/dilution well, had they not 'handed' themselves free shares year after year of subpar performance--in the form of options, had they been able to command less lousy financing terms, had they actually spread their IP bearing wings to increase shareholder value, instead of hanging on by a broken wing and a prayer, then at that point, we would have had suitable answers for the questions surrounding management performance. The results alone are reason to question management, but the choices made and misfortune dealt are just icing on top.

I believe management is serious. I don't believe their motivation was proactive, just reactive. This situation we are in, and continue to be in over the years, is a result of management not making the right choices at the right time to avoid it. They rely on the dilution, it is a pattern--it is a predictable and (usually) reliable Plan B with a lethargic Plan A (partnership/equity stake)that is never attained.

My instincts say the science can overcome the mediocre-at-best management, it already has with the RD revelation, but management needs to be more aggressive, which means they need to change their flight direction.

[haysaw]

<<That is complete BS.>>

I guess sometimes the best defense is to just walk away from the debate. It is like Cortex walking away from a shitty deal with R&R, for spite, only to get a shittier deal with JMP. "Here's looking out for you, shareholders."

[gfp927z]

Thanks Neuro. Schering is something of a wildcard lurking under our radar, since with their Org-26576 data in hand for Depression, and soon for ADHD, they'll be making some decisions on the future of those programs. They'll need to decide whether or not to lock up some of Cortex's new low impacts, or risk leaving them hanging out there for a competitor.