The level of reporting and disclosure that we have come to expect at RAC HC is way above what is required for biotechs in general. Thats what creates a situation where lack of information, delays in doing something, or other unexpected occurences that are typical of any clinical trials (due to the number of moving parts), get magnified.
Rather than the company and its CRO quietly going through their paces, as is the norm, we find ourselves worrying over whats happenned to the one patient that we know of that was enrolled. Are they well? Are they still on drug? Actually, is anyone on drug?
It was the same thing with the signing of the ethics forms - which saw some shareholders throwing tantrums and firing explicits and threats towards imaginary people they did not even know.
Personally - I prefer a situation where promises are fewer, but deliveries exceed.
Further, I wish RAC could discuss other matters - strategy, etc. Surely, with 34 molecules discovered just last year, and 2 science writers, etc etc: how can it be that we seem to be focussed so much on this one trial, that has one patient on drug, or is it 2, 3, or zero? How can this one trial stall everything else? Isn't this what makes RAC look like a one pony company? I know some will say iys a pony with many tricks - what difference does it make if that pony is locked up somewhere?
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)