To: HardToFind who wrote (3329 ) 12/11/2014 1:25:31 PM From: drkaz Respond to That's a very evenhanded assessment HardToFind. This has been historically a failing of NNVC - staying on a clear path, and in communicating what milestones are and what deliverables from those milestones mean to the process (and shareholders) needs to be unambiguously laid out. They do (IMO) appear to be doing a much better job at this during the last year or two than for the previous several though - so I view that as a positive sign. I actually don't think that this factor IS a huge concern at this stage. With >$40 MM on hand and a fairly low cash burn rate, the company is set pretty well through at least this time next year,.... by which point there should be some clarity on 1) How well Ebolacides are panning out, 2) How well scaling up production at Shelton has progressed, and 2) How much progress there has been made on pushing TOX for Flucide through. It may become something to be concerned about towards the end of 2015 but it is nothing to get overworked about yet. This particular concern I don't share - but I can see where some of the concern to others enters in. The way that NNVC is set up, the fact that NNVC does not own the IP it uses (although the terms of liscencing are very favorable IMO), and the fact that the insiders do control (directly or indirectly) a very large voting bloc of shares all can be spun in a very negative manner. I am not sure what measures could be taken by management to partially address these concerns - any specific suggestions you might have on this topic? I would view this as a bit of an overstatement - but I do appreciate the anology you are making. The degree of NNVC being undervalued is (IMO again) in large part simply because - like most other developmental-stage biotechs - to date, NNVC hasn't successfully completed anything that is a revenue generator. That problem will take care of itself as the 'Cides move forward. Love the thinking here though.
