Biotech's should never has scientists as MD / CEO's - they need...

Biotech's should never has scientists as MD / CEO's - they need to stick with what they do best & put those with business acumen at the helm. It's been a long held problem, sure they made a little shuffle but all they really did was replace one scientist with another.

Another issue here is they just seem mislead I guess again comes down to the fact they keep scientists in the top seat. The would run figures looking to for acquisition & then band on about don't worry about the share price "look at these examples of peers acquired at this point". Problem there is every single company they used as peer comparisons were private companies acquired for say $200-$500M on preclinical or maybe Phase 1 data. You jus wont see a company make a move for another listed penny stock at 1-2,000% premium though - if you want to be listed and be acquired for that kind of figure you need to first get it closer to that mark. Very unlikely you will see an acquisition made at premium of 100%+ - meaning where it sits now unlikely you would get an offer at more than $50M. They really need to work on getting the MC to $100M+ if they want to see an acquisition made at any kind of weighty figure.

Sure $9M was a good move for capital but they have been close to that before - I think 2011 they put $8M in the bank, 2013 $6M - each time with big ambitions.