Well, I find it very strange that you would suppose retail gets excited about lodging IP, as opposed to actual trial results. You're not describing IHL when you talk about lapsed IP because no data could be shown. That has not happened, and there is no reason to believe it will happen to the key assets IHL has communicated it intends to actively develop in pursuit of either reaching commercialization or a buyout. In other words, your scenario is literally a bogeyman tale to scare little children. What got retail excited were (and hopefully will be) positive trial results - mere patents filed typically don't raise people's pulses.
It seems you do have an understanding that what Cannvalate did with their clinics does not have any bearing on IHL, so what 'body of evidence' should we be worried about exactly? You're adept at making scary noises, I'll give you that. Waiving a term like 'body of evidence' around in a vague manner could be disquieting to some, except you seem unable to articulate what proceeding that body of evidence would be a part of, relating to IHL.
I personally do not know the qualifications individual posters might have to judge the quality of management, but clearly praise of management has been offered for the results they have obtained. You can quibble over whether the term 'top tier' is warranted or not: I'm sure you are right someone has said that along the way. But at the end of the day, who cares? What a shareholder should want to see is that the drug candidate trials are being properly managed and are receiving positive results. I think it is a bit of a silly game to wonder whether posters on this forum are qualified to praise management: doesn't it matter more that a certain caliber of industry professional did their due diligence on Incannex and decided to join their efforts? Bob Clarke is certainly more qualified than you or me to determine who he wants to associate himself with, and with his on-going executive level employment at Novo Nordisk, he doesn't need to lower his standards. Dr Paul Liknaitzky chooses to work hand in hand with Incannex: maybe he knows something you don't? Peter Widdows has over 15 years of executive level experience with global corporations, including 5 successful years at the helm of the Heinz corporation's Australian section... maybe he's qualified to evaluate Incannex and decide to work with them?
For someone who seems to feel this company is selling hot air, your sentiment is nevertheless 'buy', and your disclosure is 'held'. You don't seem interested in discussing the actual progress of the company... only constructing a narrative of shadiness based on guilt by association and innuendo... Hmmm.
