Good afternoon @Cuprum29 ,Thank you for your kind words. Yes, I...

Good afternoon @Cuprum29 ,

Thank you for your kind words. Yes, I probably have a deeper background than many posting on ATH, but as I have stated before I don’t work with the ‘aging’ brain, I work at the other end (developing brain), so I am certainly not an ‘expect’ in PD, so my opinions should be treated as that ... opinions.

Please note I did state ... “Please feel free to differ,but I won’t be responding to debate the points, because they are just my thoughts” ... but I am happy to clarify or expand on (not debate) the two points you “have reservations about”. I commend you on raising concerns because they do generate deeper thinking. As we know, things are rarely ‘black and white’. (‘Itsa’ please note).

Note on Reservation #2 - "the ridiculous current SP?"

Our current MC is $64m ... seriously? The data suggests we have a treatment for MSA. No other Pharma is near this. We are it! In my opinion, even with the massive number of shares on offer, the MC should be a lot closer to $400-500m. But as I said, my opinion.

Note on Reservation #1 - "a likely move to a Parkinsons trial (possibly even later this year)"

You are correct, we will need a considerable amount of ‘new’ money to fund a Parkinsons trial going forward. It would likely be a Phase 2 or even a larger Phase 2/3 if the FDA really love what we already have for MSA. Feasibly, this trial could only go ahead if we ‘picked up’ a wealthy partner (Big Pharma), who would either fund that trial separately (as part of the initial MSA deal) or if ATH would fund, using the generous ‘upfronts’ we receive from this potential deal. It seems @Tradeyoursoul has ‘similar thoughts’ also.

I believe you will find that the recent ATH conference session generated huge interest, first with the attending neuroscientists and clinicians, and second from attending Big Pharma ‘scouts’. I have ‘indirectly’ asked ATH about the response at the conference and it seems that clinicians are both excited and relieved to know that they are soon ‘likely’ to be able to offer their MSA patients a viable treatment. Watch the diagnosis of MSA jump now.

Also, I believe that you count on the neuroscientists and clinicians shooting questions in about PD itself. Why? It is clear that we may a treatment. Clinician support will carry considerable weight, both with BP and FDA.

Note: I don’t see the trial launching this year but I do expect that ‘discussions’ will be held with FDA sooner than later, provided they like our MSA data. Many think that the FDA is a big ‘bogey’ drug juggernaut that would rather block than approve. Not so. They want safety and they want efficacy. We have both. PD is a huge and a very, very expensive burden for any system ... and if the FDA thinks we have a strong candidate, they will hold frank discussions with ATH.

So, this is my current opinion. I retain the right to alter my current thesis on news, good or bad, or on deals, or not. If I am ‘way off’ I may have to alter my tag to ‘Outlier2’ or something even more appropriate.

Have a wonderful Easter Break

All the opinion of just one poster (who had a little spare time on a holiday weekend).