Ann: PTX strategic collaboration with MD Anderson Cancer Center, page-46

I confess, I thought the same for quite a while. In my quieter moments I often daydreamed about some power-convergence between IMU and PTX, especially when I was jealous of IMU being all the rage with a SP over 50c while PTX struggled to get a single mention in the media for months at a time (The Dark Times, lol).

But now? I don't see the necessity. As Supertramp said presciently (ha!), PTX is doing fine with racking up collabs by themselves. Going back to my "fledgling" analogy, it looks like PTX is demonstrating that it can hop and fly by itself and I don't want to see a loss of control with the value that the team has built into the company being absorbed by another party who's goals might be different.

I still hew to my conspiracy theory that the reason PTX gets to work with "only the best" (as SYC keeps pointing out) is that there's a non-publicized meeting of minds between participants about how they want to see the field of oncology be a better servant to patients needs over the naked, rampant profiteering of the sector for the last 50 years and I don't know if that meets IMU's corporate philosophy.

Who's to say all of PTX's partners would be thrilled about IMU's culture and just shift obediently? What brotherhood of commitments have been made to get these partnerships done? Peter Mac and others are as much stakeholders in the entire enterprise as the shareholders. So I wish IMU good luck and bon chance but no thank you.

Let's not lie to ourselves, we're here for the money but if it can be done by usurping the horrific tales of medical bills you read about in the US then we can go to sleep telling ourselves we've made a difference, even if we didn't actually do anything...