@Gitmo . Personally, I don't allow SP's to change my perception...

@Gitmo . Personally, I don't allow SP's to change my perception of a stock. The issue here isn't the declining SP but the lack of the promised data.

If the company failed/delayed to release the data just because it was bad news (patient adverse reactions or worsening healing time or higher infection rates) and went on to spend investors' money on a larger trial, I think we would have a legal case for them to answer to. Also, IV trial participants may launch a claim for failing to allow patients to make an informed decision. So the company is never going to delay data for bad reasons.

Either the data is equivocal or it's really impressive. Remember it was a phase I and II (safety as well as efficacy). As I said, if the burns data did not meet safety endpoints, you could not ethically administer the RCE327 intravenously. However, if safety okay but efficacy was equivocal you could at least proceed to the IV trial. The other scenario is that the efficacy and safety were really really impressive and we are staring down a long tunnel with a light at the end. You cannot question if the light at the end is the approaching number 26 train or $26 until the data is fully released.

We have obviously a few more sellers than buyers because they feel the delay is not good news. How can you know the real reason? You can't, so until then, keep that poker face.

"P-p-p-poker face, p-p-poker face (mum-mum-mum-mah)", Lady Aggga