Honing in, page-9

If were all stung a little by bio's comments then we need something to prove him wrong? Another interesting comment was the top 20 being mostly individuals. Not sure typically if a lot of instos get involved in companieswith 2c sp and 1bil + shares on issue, but interesting point. It would seem almost inevitable at some point that a consolidation takes place to drop shares on issue to maybe 150 mil at a dollar or two per share to appeal to instos as something other than a penny dreadful.

The thing we should be noting is bio is obviously not a fan and obviously has some knowledge in the area, and he has conceded that we may be turning the corner. I'd take that any day rather than the but wait there's more type posts generally available from the less criticized posters who don't need to present a CV.

I liked Wayne's post starting another thread where he referred to bios comments years ago that pyc had no data and nothing to show on CPP,ss. He also stated that this was a highly sought after area of research where no one was having any luck. That appeared correct at the time, and we since hit 1.4c or less sp so no questions there. Again taking these most critical comments we could now say that even without omomyc we have now shown via an external though surely paid source that we can achieve cell penetration not only with our phylomers but with conjugated drugs? Not sure how in depth or clinical the rest data is but even at worst it must indicate we are making headway on a field of research that bio indicates is highly prized if exploited. Leave Bio to keep posting in peace, I for one enjoy following up on the technical or commercial arguments and trying to refute them. If we can't find the positive arguments to counter his points then we shouldn't be here cos it must be a did.