I don't think, in the midst of the worst global pandemic in over...

I don't think, in the midst of the worst global pandemic in over a century, and in light, particularly, of the shambles that is the United States at this moment, that a delay of an "anticipated" enrollment completion of at most six months can credibly be described as an "extensive trial timeline blowout." You want timeline blowouts and delays for stem cell trials in ARDS? Look at Athersys. Not at MSB. We are weeks away from the third interim readout.

And more than anything, I don't believe it was SI or MSB spouting those dates to merely build hype, when it's always been clear (particularly to SI, he probably watches the SP swings closer than we do, and knows very well how the market punishes MSB for going too long without news and for missing deadlines...) that ONLY results from the trial were going to result in a sustained re-rating of the price.

If you disagree, and think he was putting out dates for completion that he didn't believe in, why do you think he would do so? How does he benefit by deliberately promising too much, too fast? I would also like to understand whether and how you think any long-term shareholder has been negatively impacted by the delay.

I would surmise that SI and MSB had every intention of having the trial fully enrolled by the "anticipated" date, but they underestimated the complexity of organising during a pandemic, and the ability and willingness of hospitals to come online and get up to speed dosing patients. If that's the case, it seems a perfectly reasonable and excusable basis for the delay, and harsh to throw stones for underestimating things. Nonetheless, and even with the (what I view as a minor) delay, they have done more than a reasonable job of updating us on enrollment and interim readouts.

Anyone that expects more detailed information NOW from MSB would likely be wise to see if they are hiring, so they can get on the inside and find out exactly what's going on down to nth degree.