Fourmm.....I think you missed the point of my post a bit.

Your question of whether outstanding science can survive mediocre management....I'm suggesting that "perhaps" the mediocre performance of management...that perhaps its by design.

No doubt everyone was thrilled with the performance of management 10 years or so back when the PPS was $10/$15/$20.....PPS is the typical yardstick for retail investors, if the PPS is moving higher it follows that management must be doing a good job, if its moving lower, then they must be dropping the ball.

I'm assuming though that back when the PPS was much higher....that the company was raising a lot of money, much more than the $10 million they just went to the market for....I wasn't around back then though and I'm too lazy to go back into what now amonts to ancient history.

But regardless....no doubt retail investors likely were happy to storm in and pay that $10, $15, $20....because obviously the company was executing, it had to be because the PPS was climbing.  

Now....to me it almost strikes me that the company is trying to cheese off its long time retail holders, those who were paying those inflated (compared to now) prices....there's enough posts that express this dissatisfaction, they've been happening regularly....especially since the overnight offering.  That in spite of the fact that we now know that the PPS coincided with short interest climbing from 200 odd thousand to over 800K....a four fold increase.

I almost get the feeling that Resverlogix is sitting on a winning lottery ticket...a Super Ball Lottery winner x 100 maybe. But some of the 50 million odd shares, I'm thinking/opining/guessing....maybe too many of those shares are in the hands of retail sheep, the herd.  Remember what so many have said about the market, that its designed to transfer money from the not so wealthy to the rich.  Let's say there are 10 or 20 million shares in the cumulative hands of retail investors.....What would those shares be worth if RVX gets to a MC of say $5 billion in USD?

So what to do.....if I was suggesting to a company things it could do to exasperate shareholders here are some suggestions I'd make.

-promise new analyst coverage but never deliver on it

-skip out on an investor presentation and don't notify anyone beforehand or give any reason after

-mess up on things like slide presentations by putting the wrong figures in and then say it was a typeo

-tell everyone a  deal is coming with a timeline....then just go quiet and let the deadline pass

Of course its a little tricky....public companies and their directors have a fidcuiary responsibility to act in the best interests of their shareholders....ya don't want to have some ambulance chasing legal outfit winning a case against the company.

So make sure you have some long tenured analysts you've used before, and keep paying them to put out periodic reports and updates.  Continue to answer requests that come into IR and appear responsive....I see it as a fine line.  That's why I used the relationship analogy...with someone wanting to break up with someone after they've slept together....of course in this instance it would be more a case of getting someone to sell for $1 or $2 bucks after they paid $10 - $20 for it.

I realize this is very conspiratorial thinking, and that my cynicism is maybe over the top.  But I know that in business that its pretty much SOP, that when two parties are negotiating a deal.....that both will operate under the assumption that the. other guy is out to screw them.  Thus it is incumbant to screw them first....harder and faster.