InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

BonelessCat

09/01/10 12:12 PM

#37709 RE: WILD_4_IPIX #37708

Thanks for that W4N. It's what I've been saying, though I had said NDA and Phase 0/1 and not completed Phase 1 and Phase 2a begun.

My take is that the best deal comes from completion of early Human testing, and that the negotiating part of the MTA is open ended. Further, there is absolutely no reason to think the big pharma testing was anything but successful and every reason to conclude that the pharma wants the IP license for a few nickels and a dime.
icon url

Ovidius

09/01/10 12:27 PM

#37710 RE: WILD_4_IPIX #37708

What a total joke!! That sure was not the tune back in Jan.2009!
Failed deal is the bottom line here, failed IMO, due to lack of results....

You guys are going to have every single penny stolen from you through these NNVC life style execs.

New target for NNVC, $.03 cents! LOL
icon url

TheBunny

09/01/10 12:50 PM

#37712 RE: WILD_4_IPIX #37708

There you go mx. You got your answer through a 'fire-side chat'. -HA! -Told Ya!-

-Bunny-
icon url

Ubertino

09/01/10 1:23 PM

#37714 RE: WILD_4_IPIX #37708

Re--I thought that I had made it clear in the past about optimal timing for striking licensing agreements with large pharmas. The ideal time to strike is after FDA approved Phase I safety and Phase IIa efficacy studies are completed.--

That's clear but has absolutely NOTHING to do with the only agreement - MTA - NNVC made to date. How is that going? Where does IT stand? Is it now superseded by the above statement which renders it inconsequential? Strange way to do business! Where does that MTA stand now, today, in existence, or not? Waiting for FDA EKC-Cide approval? Who will sponsor EKC-Cide in the trials? NNVC or that unnamed big pharma? If NNVC - we better raise tons more cash.
icon url

Nanotoday

09/01/10 7:01 PM

#37727 RE: WILD_4_IPIX #37708

Didn't NNVC announce it was in discussions with a big pharma? If Dr. Seymour thinks now is not the time to be doing this...then why was he doing this?
icon url

noretreat

09/01/10 7:40 PM

#37728 RE: WILD_4_IPIX #37708

My take on the letter posted today from Dr. Seymour is that this board has widely misinterpreted the so-called 18-month agreement with the "mystery pharma". Apparently there never were negotiations about licensing or any other possible financial arrangements. It remains unclear exactly what the agreement was for or IF a formal agreement ever existed.

Anyone actually know anything, or is it all speculation?