10BagR - I agree with you totally. I don't quite know how you may have interpreted any of what I have written in the last couple of weeks as something that would influence a BO but that's okay.

Right now we have a group of investors that by in large have been in this story for a number of years that have not seen a return on their investment and are a little ticked. When most of the current investors bought into this story they probably heard it from a friend or business associate or read an interesting article that peaked their interest at that time. They probably told a couple of friends about their purchase and maybe a couple of those friends bought some shares as well. In essence they created a market.

What we seem to have now is the reverse of that. There seems to be some management challenges, okay there is, that most "here" seem to agree on. At the same time there is some extraordinary science that appears to be being developed. What seems to have taken place over the last 6 months or so is that one aspect, management, appears to have overtaken all else.

In my experience a stock will start to run up when a number of potential investors hear a story that sounds exciting and that could continue for a time. Maybe that's a new technology, or the potential for gold, silver or oil to be at the bottom of a hole that's about to be drilled, or in our case a new drug that's being developed. In most of the examples above results of those efforts are heard relatively quickly and are either good or bad. In the case of biotech the results can be good and you may still have 5 or 10 years before a major event like a buyout could happen. In RVX's case they had some good results but missed the end points required to pass their PIII trial. Lots of investors bailed on that news but a lot didn't because the potential of the drug still has a lot of merit.

Arguably the write up in the Cell journal is the best news this company has ever had but we had no traction in the share price past a day or two. The "why" of that is where my comments are focused on. When you go back to the second paragraph its now all going in reverse. Few existing shareholders are telling anyone anything so we have the same people that own this company talking amongst each other and mostly all with negative undertones.

In order to have the share price move up a company generally needs to attract new shareholders. In order to attract new shareholders they use the resources at hand which toady includes social media. Since social media is so easy for anyone to use it tends to be the first place many potential shareholders go to as a starting point only. Unfortunately some never get past that point and make their decision right then and there because it is only momentum that they are looking for, and nothing else. GME is a great recent example of a momentum only play.

RVX seems to have a tremendous technology that could benefit many people in many areas. COVID came along and threw a wrench into the works for the entire world. More money time and effort has been put into finding ways to deal with it than anything ever in the world up to this point. As it turns out RVX's lead candidate ABL seems to have the potential to be a therapeutic that could be used to ease or eliminate suffering for those that catch this virus. From the articles I've read it seems to be the only drug developed so far that could actually reverse damage to organs that were negatively affected from the virus. But what was heard? Management this, management that all because it's the same group of investors rehashing the same thing over and over.

We need new shareholders in order to move the share price up. In order to attract new shareholders we need to get rid of the stinking thinkin. At the end of this saga it will be a BP that walks away with the prize(science and scientists) and management won't matter anyways. In the mean time we need them to make a deal. The only thing we existing shareholders need to determine is if the existing management has the ability to attract a deal and make the right one. If you believe in the science and mgnt, stay. If you believe in the science and are questioning the mgnt your on the fence and either need to support mgnts decisions or exit. If you don't believe the science will work and that mgnt sucks then why are you here stuck in this story.

Question; has anyone on this board that has expressed their concern about mgnt ever written to any of the independent Board members with their concerns? To me that would be more appropriate than continually airing the dirty laundry on a public forum.

tada