I wasn't really going to respond, it's not really my place to...I'm not the company, in fact I'm just a retail holder and I do the odd bit of research on the drug
.
But it's just too tempting for me not to say anything, but YOU have to not get nasty at ME...YOU have to understand these are just my thoughts and while I could be wrong...totally wrong..I could also be partially correct.
No clarity on peer review, patentsIt took what seemed like FOREVER to get peer review back on RRV...I think it was at least a full 1.5 years after it was originally thought that we'd get it back...when we actually got it back, it was great when it finally came out. I believe it is a similar situation with P2 OA...its taking a lot longer, there are a few reasons, none of which I think has to do with poor results. I can't see why these results wouldn't be the same as SAS for instance, I don't think there is anything to worry about. BUT I know this isn't your point, it is lack of communications. Im not sure why it wasn't addressed, they could've just said that it is in progress, we will get an update out when we hear back etc I know for a fact I passed that question on....Yes we will ask this at the AGM for sure.
TGA Provisional ApprovalAccording to what I understand, they won't be submitting this till the very last patient is dosed at the minimum. Knowing the TGA...I would assume they (TGA) will be conservative and want the FULL data set according to the revised protocols, read 12 months after last patient first dosed. Only my speculative thoughts.
Lack of public KOL endorsementThey aren't going to comment yet on a drug in P3....we have had some indications via Peer Review (CHIK-V) and the Mt Sinai researchers along with just the fact that Dr D Felson represented us for the first time ever in his career that he has gone to bat for a company....that in itself is one of the highest endorsements from a KOL that I can find. Didn't they just say that the Principle Investigator for UK has also signed up, this wouldn't happen if that expert thought we were zero chance, the drug was sh*% and we has little to no prospects and it is at all risky. Not sure the company is going to explain all this to us at granularity. Its up to us to realise this.
Lack of institutional investmentPossibly a fraction too early? A lot of funds cant take a stake in us yet, we are too cheap, too small and too early...this will change over time.
Now I again reiterate, I know you aren't just asking for answers to these, you know most of this, Im preaching to the converted. BUT I do understand your point on communication.
At the same time it is prob hard for such a small co to go into every detail of every question asked, the material up above can all be pieced together.
If you still are disappointed, vote with your feet or raise it when next we have a physical chance to do so.
Completely my views
(20min delay)