Has OSL peaked at 26c at 100m mcap ?, page-97

Yes, the legal threat is a low act in my opinion.

Hardly any biotechs succeed. That is the harsh reality.

So if things operated logically, instead of reading all this positive spin everywhere on our biotech companies, we should be reading lots of hyper-realistic, sobering-up analysis from people who know something about the topic.

But the system doesn't allow that, because lots of people want to make money out of these punts.

Publicly listed biotechs have to talk themselves up because they need to raise their $5 - $15m of money every year.

Companies will even pay analysts to write glowing reports, and those analysts will happily oblige because they want that money.

The brokers need to talk up the stock to their clients; otherwise, how are they able to complete the fund raising for their 10% profit or whatever?

People on share trading forums will talk up the shares and try hard to lure other punters in; and should anyone express a negative view they'll probably get abused, and told "Down-ramper! If you don't hold the stock, why are you here? Go away!"

But what happens when some industry-knowledgeable someone gives a sober, well-reasoned argument why a biotech sounds like it's probably not going to succeed?

He gets threatened with a law suit,and told "apologise, retract everything you've written, and please never talk about our company again!"

---
Instead of making legal threats and demanding apologies and "cease and desists", why wouldn't the OSL management team simply give a counter-response to the arguments made? Wouldn't that be the more mature thing to do?