It sounds almost like you're saying that negative surprises cannot arise in the case of 113 by the nature of the drug?
Most definitely not saying that. Surprises are by definition unexpected and thus cannot be logically eliminated. What I'm saying is that there seems to be a spillover effect from the problems with Iclusig, and that there's no foundation for that. It's a psychological issue for investors. The characteristics of 113 as a molecule, have nothing in common with Iclusig, and the molecular pathways impinged upon by 113 are also different, thus no inferences can be drawn from one to the other.