To: BoredMember who wrote (12476 ) 12/3/2019 2:15:43 PM From: HardToFind Respond to of 12873 The two statements are not mutually exclusive:I don't know that Diwan intended [the company to never make money for common shareholders], but he has certainly made it a priority to take care of himself [first], at great expense to the common shareholders. ...whereas it was just tough luck that he swindled the shareholders out of their $100 mn due to his egregious licensing terms and the general display of managerial corruption... I believe Diwan originally thought that the company would be wildly successful, and a small portion of the profits would accrue to the investors. I think Diwan actually believed all of those early projections that FluCide would be rapidly approved, scale up cleanly, and more drugs would rapidly follow...enriching common shareholders. To hedge his bets, Diwan's portion would come out first, irrespective of profits to the investors. They were taking the risk, not he. This was intentional. Diwan knew this wasn't a fair negotiation, but still thought common shareholders would be benefitted. Despite his swindling and chicanery toward the shareholders to negotiate the first licensing agreement with himself, I believe he still thought common shareholders would profit. This was simply Diwan's way of controlling the future of the company and protecting his own outsized interests. Yes, this was unethical, but initially Diwan still thought the common shareholders would benefit handsomely. Perhaps he still thinks that, but I doubt he does with nearly his original conviction. I presume we differ on this point of whether Diwan ever intended common shareholders to profit. I believe he did...it just wasn't very high on his list of priorities. I get the sense you believe Diwan never intended common shareholders to make a profit. Is that correct?