Idronoxil was shelved. True. And yet Dr Kelly and the Noxopharm...

Idronoxil was shelved. True. And yet Dr Kelly and the Noxopharm board this past week have managed to raise a further $10.8 million to pursue its potential - and in the rush to buy in, the capital raise according to the company was oversubscribed.

Not a bad effort. And not only that but Friday's closing price is at a 13% to 14% premium of the offer at 90 cents. That says something.

I think of Idronoxil along the same lines as the development of the Ford motor company by its founder Henry Ford. There was in fact a Model A, a Model B, a Model C and so on. The model T not only launched the car maker but it revolutionized the manufacturing process in the US and elsewhere in the world.

Its not hard to think of other comparable examples. Inventiveness is the key to success in the case of NOX 66, not just the drug technology itself.

GDC-0084 was unwanted by its developer - otherwise they would still have it. The $5 million appears to be nothing out of the box as an asking price and there appears to be no evidence provided of a bidding war to secure it.

Kazia has published the GDC Phase 1 results. Since that time, the KZA share price has fallen. That doesn't speak highly of GDC at this point in time. Given the clinically unmet need to the problem it is trying to address, that speaks volumes.

Now one of two things arising from the purchase of GDC 0084. Either the Kazia Board knew that the Anisina drug platform developed by Professor Gunning was experiencing problems or they didn't. If they did, it is then open to speculation that they purchased GDC 0084 in a bid to counter this. Alternatively, if the Kazia board was unaware of the impending toxicity issues, then the only real alternative is that the scientists were not communicating with the Board. If that is correct, then Dr Garner would appear not to have his finger on the pulse at Kazia - or not at that time anyway.

So back to the first scenario that the Kazia Board bought GDC 0084 (thanks to the funds raised by Dr Kelly), as a means of damage control. If this is correct and perhaps more likely to be the case, it pretty much scotches Kazia's claim that this has been their intention from the very beginning. It was simply forced on them. Arguably, it has been a ruse to inform Kazia shareholders otherwise.

Either way, neither storyline represents a good look for the company.

Most investors are not stupid harvett. Hence maybe the seven cents preconsolidated share price.