I'd like to float an alternative explanation. Historically, an...

I'd like to float an alternative explanation. Historically, an investor backing an antibiotic was not in his best interests since the antibiotic was only ever used for a few days to maybe a week or two. So investors don't see any strong earnings in episodic drugs. You and I both know RCE to be a little different. Sepsis treatments that do not promote resistance and ones that have universal use have many applications:

1. The drug of choice in an acute life threatening sepsis episodes be they viral or bacterial in origin.
2. Treatment for localised infection before it becomes sepsis. The entry points for acute sepsis mostly include; A respiratory tract infection, skin/wound infection or urinary tract infection and if identified early could be universally treated with RCE's product.
3. Possibly medical devices which commonly are portals for acute sepsis could be coated with the product.

The idea of first-line treatment (drug of first choice) because no bacterial resistance or adverse side effects makes RCE a compelling investment. Awareness of such developments is paramount for finding a partner and I suggest this is a primary reason behind the advertisements with a second reason to keep the shareprice higher for the next round of funding.