As 1 of 4 patent holders Voit has a vested interest in micro-dystrophin (thus Sarepta) succeeding, but that doesn't mean there's a conflict of interest.
There would be a conflicting interest if he were PI for us and we were competing with Sarepta, but wouldn't a partnership remove conflict from the equation?
i.e. The Voit PI theory bolsters the Sarepta partnership theory and vice versa.
At this juncture, it's probably worth recalling that Voit was talking up combination therapy (and our results) before Sarepta failed. I wonder what advice he's giving now...
Good luck guys!!
p.s. I actually responded to the wrong post, sorry Uboy. I clearly need some sleep.
As 1 of 4 patent holders Voit has a vested interest in...
Add PER (ASX) to my watchlist
 (20min delay)
|
|||||
|
Last
7.5¢ |
Change
0.000(0.00%) |
Mkt cap ! $67.61M | |||
| Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
| 7.6¢ | 7.6¢ | 7.5¢ | $13.48K | 179.2K |
Buyers (Bids)
| No. | Vol. | Price($) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 254315 | 7.5¢ |
Sellers (Offers)
| Price($) | Vol. | No. |
|---|---|---|
| 7.8¢ | 97444 | 1 |
View Market Depth
| Last trade - 12.35pm 22/05/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
|
|||||
|
Last
7.5¢ |
Change
0.000 ( 3.60 %) |
||||
| Open | High | Low | Volume | ||
| 7.5¢ | 7.5¢ | 7.5¢ | 50815 | ||
| Last updated 12.35pm 22/05/2024 ? | |||||
| PER (ASX) Chart |