While I would agree that the communication of message and management of RVX in general is poor I think the major “tipping point” could be when the Hepalink deal closes and the IP is free and clear of encumberance.  As I said in an earlier post IMO the looming loss of IP has kept potential development partners away starting at least a couple of years back.  It would have made no business sense to start investing development money into a program, even if very interested, that takes years to complete when the program would be at risk of being forfeited as a result of a call on collateral which the program would be attached to. That the business management always appears to be stumbling around and has little or no real track record of biotech achievement would do nothing to inspire a potential partners confidence.

Further I think the IP risk combined with little business headway in the last couple of years has largely kept the bulk of the retail shareholder market on the sidelines. I know for me personally as a shareholder I have not bought any new shares since 65 cents other than to replace shares sold on the occasional run ups we’ve had. I still believe the science is sound and will perhaps put new money to work once the Hepalink deal closes AND I see some evidence that management is capable of capitalizing on the company’s IP assets. Things of this nature would include the actual start (not more talk) of the CKD dialysis trial, Fabry’s trial and partnerships in these areas as well as partnerships on the new compounds which we have heard talk about for roughly 2 years now but have seen no action.