Where we at?, page-409

To be fair, he doesn't say that funding options won't be looked at until FDA confirms 2x2 / Phase III, he actually says non-dilutionary funding will "likely coincide" with confirmation - and progress - on 2x2. I'd suggest a large pinch of salt with anything that comes from anyone associated with PAR these days, but that's interesting phrasing to see from someone with intimate knowledge of the company's search for funding options.

Maybe you guys are all right, and i've been too blind. I honestly never felt that 2x2 doubts were weighing so heavily on the SP (I thought it was entirely a manipulation bet by instos on the need for future CR's, as well as doubts around PAR's ability to sign agreements due to us not being the Drug owner) but I guess maybe 2x2 doubts are real and are having a material SP impact. It really scuppers confidence levels for the trials (and therefore the company) if we can't use 2x2. I have just never heard a good case why the FDA would reject it on the grounds of the rat anomaly (and it was an absolute anomaly) or any other reason. It doesn't make sense to me, and seems (to me) to be borne from a fear that the FDA aren't genuinely seeking to find and anoint a disruptive chronic-pain therapeutic - which I believe they are. If the SP shoots up dramatically upon 2x2, we'll have the answer, and it will be a bullish answer. Not just bullish in a self-evident, price-is-going-up way, but also because it will counter fears such as those around Drug ownership / licensee agreement problems that I feared were somewhere at the heart of PARs general inability to monetise the drug to date for other indications, and this entire multi-year SP crash.