Thanks Hesk, but no motivation here, and have been following PYC...

Thanks Hesk, but no motivation here, and have been following PYC is so much as checking the share price quarterly and reading their annual reports. I think I explained myself pretty well, and sorry if trying to provide an unbiased view of the company. I not trying to dampen valuation or enhance valuation, since I have no vested interest, simple provide a view, which I can pretty much guarantee is the same lens through which BigPharma and Big Institutional Investors are viewing it. In regards to delivering Omomyc to cells, in vitro or xeno-graft models are one thing, and yes other companies can do exactly this, and I am sorry, but from what I have seen, in some cases better, but there is a big development leap from Xeno mouse model to human, since none of this is looking at PK/PD or other important aspects needed to prepare a clinical data package. I think in the case of Omomyc, PYC has some nice starting data, and that should be something they can share with Dr. Soucek and hopefully give them a leg up on getting a license to it, so they can do something with it. Do i think they are making some nice progress in the CPP area that may be applicable to other biologics for delivery to cancer cells, yes, but they have yet to address any of the numerous other flaws with how it actually behaves in vivo in humans. This has what has always tripped up CPP programs in the past. And, no, lastly, I am all too familiar with the technology and platform, and have zero confidence they could find a peptide inhibitor of cMyc from their libraries, I am sorry, whether you believe me or not, I know what the platform is capable of and what it is not. Do you really think anyone really wants to use a huge protein biologic to inhibit cMyc like Dr. Soucek has been, you can search small molecule inhibitors and there are always publications on cMyc inhibitors, the problem is that cMyc's functional domains are very similar to a number of other critical transcription factors, that when you get small, i.e. peptides or small molecules, you can inhibit Myc, but also inhibit these others, leading to off-target effects that derail development. Omomyc has the selectivity, that can only be attained with the large protein they use because of the manner in which it interacts. Sorry, this explanation might be a little too much, but it is what it is.

To DS, the market determines the valuation as you likely all to well know, and I am not at all trying to dampen valuation, but to attain a long-term patient and willing to hold the shares investor base, they need to be informed, and they need to understand where the company can go long term, not these day trader swings from day to day on news, but so that they have the confidence to stay as holders when the sp goes down also. The strongest investor base IMO is the one that understands exactly what the company is trying to do, what they can do, and when they will get there (and at what cost...lol), not that trade on hype. I think the data from PYC was a very nice step forward, as I said, in a long process, but should be greeted by the market as a value add, but shouldn't be viewed as PYC is going to change the way we treat cancer or that they are going to have something in the clinic soon. Neither of these are practical scenarios.