EDIT: this post was meant as a reply to @KingBuzzoI agree with...

EDIT: this post was meant as a reply to @KingBuzzo

I agree with many of your points above. Especially those related to management's performance this year.

But I think the decision not to directly address the funding situation is only a mistake in hindsight, and possibly was viewed as, lets not undo all the positive work of this strategic review by announcing a CR at the same time. Besides there's still $20M + in the bank which DT has stated can go very far even with the new plans in place.

Management's view might have been, we expect X, Y and Z to happen between now and the next time we need funding and those three events should have a positive impact on the SP meaning we can raise at higher prices and less dilution. I think it was sensible to call out that they are looking for non-dilutive capital whether its through partnerships, licensing deals or grants.

I'm also not sure comparisons to IMU and MSB are comparing apples and apples, IMU has an incredibly diversified pipeline and each of those programs add up to an increased valuation. And in MSBs case they are so far ahead of RAC that FDA approval is in the picture, application shortcomings and 2 CRLs aside.

Correct me if I'm wrong but, whilst the Sheba outcome might be great for confidence and showing bisantrene works, I believe it has been mentioned multiple times that the trial itself is not on the approval pathway and so I'm not sure its right to say that bisantrene is a ph2 asset yet. Hence why in the plans the new trial was another Ph1/2 trial with RC220.

In any case, I hope the new board has what it takes to provide some stability and move this program forward before we all lose patience.