GAC, Icon, Bfw ...... I think GAC's flowchart for results/values is solid, and what I was trying to say in a recent rambling post ...... the residual value of RVX due to IP, Goodwill, sunk research (15-20 years of work and knowledge), plus a vast library with a few molecules HEAVILY researched and CLOSE to approval/market? ... the residual value "if" a failed primary endpoint with BoM but some level of value in secondary data and beyond will have value to the "savvy" and heavyweight industry players, but probably not to the general market (pps tumble but opportunity for others).

Love the failed diamond search and discovery of precious metals analogy. That is what is going on here. A failed previous study with the wrong endpoints, but "madly" positive ad hoc data for a different endpoint, equally valuable - our hopes now are that the RVX scientists, staisticians, study panel, etc got this BoM study right based on previous evidence for a provable outcome with vast market potential when all three endpoints are calculated.

GAC's flowchart looks fine to me, the homeruns are in the first few doors, with BoM promary endpoint achieved opening the door more quickly for interest (and pps) with the other two (and more). Heck it even opens the door for the rest of the entire library, due to advanced credibility of epigenetis and RVX, and what else may be in the attic needing "un-packing" ... no shortage of cash and pps if BoM primary is achieved.

The further down the flowchart we go (Doors 4-6), even with some level of residual promise will keep things where we're at IMHO, tenuous, worrisome, ..... we may see Don appearing on "Shark Tank" sweet talking Mark Cuban?! lol

But I do also believe the pps will absolutely TUMBLE terribly with failure on BoM primary endpoints, at least initially - but with solid data and promise for massive opportunity with CKD and Cognitive the truly long term "BP" and other players will still see opportunity ... and they will probably be NEEDED badly. Not sure HL has the pockets to carry it for another 3-4 years, and no clue where Ken Dart is on the "patience" scale other to hang on to not take a severe loss from $2.60 to $.35 (no reason to cut bait, but would he step up again?).

I could see HL or Dart (or BP) stepping up to take Third Eye out though, if enough interest in secondary endpoints existed to work towards a less satisfying deal with a BP, with time needed to reconstitute strategy and work out a deal. Heck those contingencies may (and probably are already in place) already be in place with Don (and the Board) holding out on BoM results rather than cutting deals now - go for it ... but "manage the downside" ... 

So, as we "WAIT" it is good to speculate on the worst case if bad news arrives, and look for the potential "nuggets" in what may look like a pan full of dirt pulled from the creek bed ... it eases a hopeful soul that has endured disappointment previously, and is also interesting strategic speculation.

But ... I (and most likely the rest of us here) ... are "ALL IN" on doors #1-3 ... again, I just hope the science and strategy teams got it right this time re endpoints, designed the right study, and get it right on the data analysis for an impeccably sound database for presentation that survives FDA and market scrutiny. 

Reasonable confident here, but still, just another soul on the outside looking in that requires comfort by tumbling the scenarios thru my gray matter continually lol ..... but I have been looking at videos of the new mid-engine Corvette more frequently, just not going to look at them in person yet lol ;)

Sorry for the longgggg ramble ....... feel like I am neurotically spinning in circles sometimes, and this is "therapy" for me .....

... All JMHO and my personal thoughts on the matter ...

tick tock