Hi Jim,
"The problem is both financial and tactical. $1.5 billion US is not chump change - and some might consider that price low. There's the prospect of significant competitive pressure. One or many partners? Would the chances of success be increased by having multiple partners, one for each targeted therapeutic area?"
It is mind boggling to me what people are missing here. Yes, the PIII results are pivotal here, but if they do ONCE AGAIN confirm the BMA hypothesis, then one of the world's biggest ever drugs may be born! And there is every reason to believe that the PIII results will successfully confirm the BMA, and replicate Vanderbilt
People who laugh at my assertion here, will not have researched WF10 enough. It may be hard to find scientific information on WF10, but it is out there for the diligent investigator. What Dr.Kuhne, McGrath and associates have created is nothing short of staggering in terms of both its clinical applications and market potential.
There is more potential in one small clinical indication of WF10 than there is in everything QLT, as a company, has in total. I'm sorry, I like ONC, ISA and BRA, but I don't believe any of them has anything close to the potential of WF10.
Add all this potential to the fact that phase III's for WF10 are wrapped up, and likely a candidate for fast track approval.
IMO, many many years from now, Dr. Kuhne and Dr. McGrath will enjoy a similar legend and lore to Banting and Best.
I had to get this out.
joe |
