"Here is the view of the boards of all 3 comps and I refer to the 3 as all hired scientists and experts have agreed to Hoppers way as this is the best way to succeed in oncology."
Hopper's way is to have raised approx: $750m across Viralytics, Imugene, Radiopharm, Prescient, Arovella and Chimeric and returned $500m to the owners of Viralytics. So his biotech career is negative $250m to date.
Of course its far worse for retail investors because Hopper and his mates never pay retail for their shares, so they haven't made a proportional contribution to the $750m but they have received a much larger proportion of the $500m that was returned.
Exactly none of his products have been successful in oncology to date. Not a single product has been commercialised - in fact I don't think any have even reached a Phase 3 trial. Please consider this when you make completely unfounded comments like the one above.
For the record, I'm not blaming him for the failure of Viralytics to be commercialised, but the one technology he was successful in selling to BP ended up shelved, so its not going to have a positive effect on his other drugs.
The main reason all those scientists and experts join the Hopper team is money. He pays heaps of it (way too much in fact) and gives them a platform that they would not otherwise have in BP land.
Its a successful approach if you are Hopper. Not so much if you are a retail investor (unless you have been lucky or expert in trading).
IMU Price at posting:
13.5¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)