Shero, I will try to be brief, since I refuse to subject readers to the sort of vapid, nasty, bitter writing that you choose to employ.
I read management's discussion (from the 10-Q), and it appears you decided to leave out a number of relevant items.
Lest the readers be mislead by you, I would suggest they actually go read the management discussion. When they do, they will realize that the burn rate is higher than last year's burn rate because:
1. TCLN now owns Peregrine (with added R&D and legal [patent] expenses).
2. TCLN now owns LYM1, so it had to write down (expense) its inventory that had been previously valued at the contracted price the drug was being sold to Alpha for during the trials.
3. The company now has a number of initiatives active in Europe, so T&E is up.
Say what you will, but I and other readers conclude these are all good things, and good things cost money. Year over year, the burn rate is up because the company has a number of exciting projects underway, around the world.
By the way, I guess I was too subtle in my last post. Here is another try:
You goofed. You failed to see the difference between operating burns and one-time burns. An inventory write-down associated with the acquisition of the rights to LYM1 is a one-time expense (burn). I bet that Ms. Frosty gave you the operating burn number at the annual meeting, not the (operating + non-recurring) burn number that was released this week. If you think that buying furniture is a recurring (quarterly) charge, well, enough said.
You goofed. And were dumb enough to get nasty about it in public.
I accept you apology in advance. |
