Edward,
I agree with you in that this Forbes article seems a bit excessive in its praise of Rathmann. However, your jabs at the other discussants here, and your claim to understand the mentality of motivations of others, is hyperbole in itself.
I have reviewed the posts on this board since your first, and I would hardly consider the response to your Gates theory as "rebukes". On the contrary, many of the responses are as thoughtful as yours, with no more evidence to contradict your theory than you have to support it.
I agree that ICOS's future is dependent not on its CEO, not on its Board, not on its technical indicators, but on its success in clinical trials. Any clinical failure may send it plummeting. I'm realistic - I expect failures, and many of them. I am particularly concerned about the MS data, which in light of the earlier trial I expect to be a bust, and I have doubts about the ability of ICOS to show benefit in a complex, hetereogeneous condition such as hemorrhagic shock. I hope for the best, but plan for the worst - my investment is hedged against drastic price declines.
I can't speak for anyone else on this board - I would not presume to know what they are thinking - but for you to suggest that I am blind or misguided in my decision to invest in ICOS is insulting. I have tried to keep an even keel about ICOS (as should be evident from my posting activity on this board), and I am confident that I have made a wise decision.
Sincerely,
Lel |
