Replies to post #32035 on NanoViricides Inc. (NNVC)

[erdoc1958]

I agree, that was a lame excuse

[BonelessCat]

I would imagine much of what was prepared a month or two ago is now out of date. With the recent focus in the foreground on funding and advancing testing, the background shifts and needs to be accounted. Before releasing PRs written about events now months old, they must vet the information one more time and make sure it is both accurate for recency and the most current reflection available. There would be nothing worse than to release information written months ago only to find out some of the data has changed or updated.

[MikeyTrades]

That struck me as odd as well. Working in the technology industry in the past, it could take weeks if not months to get two companies to agree on a press release. I can't imagine how long it would take to do the same between an SEC regulated biotech company and a University given all the hoops, committees and sign offs they might need. I would have thought it would have been much better to get the process started as soon as possible. But, as Bill Belicheck might say "it is what it is."

[Piecemaker]

It's a good question, one which I asked Dr. Seymour a few months ago.

His answer (paraphrased) was "because things can change very quickly, so the PRs have to be vetted by all sides just before they go out." And I believe he stated that this was part of the standard contract they have.

So, whatever PRs he had ready now have to be RE-reviewed by the collaborators and that is what he is doing now based on today's email.

[WILD_4_IPIX]

I think that is a very reasonable question
( NOT whining ) and candidly I wondered the
same thing when first read. Then I took into
consideration their recent travel schedules
and shelf and other priorities, and I came to the
conclusion that I always do. I trust the leadership
of the company and their decisions. Right or wrong,
that is my personal strategy until proven otherwise.