After reading this thread i can say im happily more informed to...

After reading this thread i can say im happily more informed to many perspectives and despite what as an example Fourdollars says, its good thinking and feedback. polar opposite views are exactly that, but they educate us to risks on both sides of the equation, like Hoppers track record in getting to drugs to market - one could argue that it was too early for cancer drugs years ago for this to happen, but its certainly a performance consideration and perhaps a concern. These are low odds investments that have not been solved / with new tech so that does support Hoppers agenda.

Regarding the management committee and pay I agree with both sides of the arguments presented and would say a couple of things: The stock market standard playbook for small caps is to list, create a mirage for retail / small investors, throw out hope, then off the back of this fund raise arguably fund big salaries - this behaviour is pretty pervasive and sometimes its honorable but a lot of times its dodgy capitalism. However, you cannot sell a sophisticated to-be product without a top gun exec, who needs to walk into boardrooms like Amgen or BMY and convince them of the near impossible happening. There are always examples on both sides of this.

Im better off for both sides of the opinions and the nuanced discussion, we all just need to keep it civil and respect the differences! Thanks all