Never seen such terrible outlandish and blatant rubbish,...would love to use harsher words but this isn't well, the forum for it.
Let's take it line by line now, their dribble in purple:
"Off the fence and back to a Reduce"
They never were on the fence..they were in the icky swampy side of the fence, the fence where there is bitterness, resentment, vindictiveness and a tendency to bring everyone down... if they were ever on the fence the fence pole has gone right through them and infected their pea brains (lack thereof).
"a large number of additional non-clinical studies and resubmissions to the FDA were required in order to satisfy a number of concerns held around toxicology,pharmacokinetics, and minimally effective dosage rates."
INCREDIBLE hogwash here. They paint this like we were forced to do multiple and onerous studies. They paint the picture that PK studies were a punishment....there were concerns around multiple dosage rates. No mention at all how this was a collaborative effort with the FDA, how we did our careful due diligence and in the end got the sterling result we deserved in amongst a world pandemic.
"However, looking forward we expect an update on trial cost and timeline revisions to temper the relief rally and highlight increased capital requirements."
THE sheer stupidity in their statements takes my breath away...in a bad way. I find myself amazed again at how much lack of intelligence this broker has when it comes to coverage of PAR. YOU nutbag so called brokers don't tell the full story, you don't say WHY the timelines have extended out. YOU don't say how our indication is heavily broadened, you do not mention how we are derisking and how we are ADDING to our story.
Where have you covered the bit that we went to one single jurisdiction (USA for instance) to all of Europe in parallel? Why don't you say we admit that some of the timelines have extended due to the HIGH QUALITY studies that have been added...010 Hip, Extended and durability studies...and the JEWEL of the crown 008. Where is YOUR analysis of what an inflammatory cytokine is and how iPPS acts on it and the entire concept of multi actionary.
Heightened increased capital requirements can come from many areas....it can be a good thing, most companies go through it and we have such potential for careful use of future capital that could indeed pay many many times the capital raised.
"We make no changes to our long-term assumptions..."
No change to your dumb and false assumptions is because you're basing it on idiotic research. You are not taking into consideration what has changed for the good over time, the science and the data thats coming back, you concentrate on twisting any negatives and over weighting them based on your downside bias and vindictive nature because you lost your contract a few years ago and are still crying.... Where is your testimonials from patients that say the product is sh^t, it doesn't work, it is destructive, it is terrible against the std. of care thats out there?
Get over it man...find another company to follow....or is it that you cant and just want to attempt to crush us to the ground as you have nothing better to do? Ring me, I'll give you 5 stocks now that will keep you busy. I'm not even a professional analyst. Idiots.
"... and see risk to consensus expectations versus our view of narrower marketability"
Your narrow view of marketability is matched only by your narrow mindedness. So what are you dummies telling me and readers of your amateur work? That you think the OA market is narrow? You think Heart Failure isn't experienced by many? That ARDS and CHIKV is negligible? MPS ,with its 1.4 Billion dollar potential market, too narrow for you right? What are you saying - That the entire facet of pain is a narrow addressable market? Really? Reminder here, consensus (your word) means general agreement....ie the rest of the professional brokers GENERALLY AGREE that we have something brilliant...they were saying that in their respective broker reports months and years ago. Just wait for their updates, thats what I want to read, their professional non-biassed thoughts of where we are heading and what our potential is.
..."higher competition, higher capital requirements, and IP concerns."
More evidence of their laughable analysis...higher competition, err who? Name one....just name one competitor that is at a higher level, higher chance at this moment? In the near future? That can beat our results and is as safe, durable and has any DMOAD capabilities? There is no one... This is fact. IP concerns? They need to hire a patent lawyer that can explain to them what we have and how we are covered. Before that they need a decent non biased analyst to cover us.
----------------------------------
If they are so against us, why follow us? If ANYONE was following their cra*py advice over the last 2 years they wouldn't have any shares left of PAR, so why the are they still peddling their rubbish views to their clients? Move on fools and follow someone better in the OA field, you will find no one currently and will be some years before any get close.
IF you are new to us, seek out quality reports by true UNBIASED lead professionals: MST Brokers Bell Potter Lodge Partners Baker & Young
I give you 4 brokers above to get a well rounded non biased view.
Once you are done with those quality guys then read anything by Scott Williams and Michael Goldberg for the real insight knowledge.
This will give you the true picture of what we are, what we have and what we will one day be.
(20min delay)