tada and narmac, good points.

For what it is worth my feeling re attending and presenting I think it is better to be out there spreading the word rather than sitting at home. Who knows, perhaps a new connection or reconnection could generate some interest. The really big changes that have occurred at RVX recently such as the Hepalink investment and elimination of all debt could be significant to some investors. The extremely low share price could also be a significant story to tell. I'm not sure if these stories were effectively told at the NYC conference. Given that the audience was investors perhaps the real story to tell was about why this is a great investment opportunity and to really emphsize the NPVs and speak about pre sample size/FA vs post sample size analysis in the context of risk. After all, the science is now old news but the business story is getting very little attention.

Another message that Don should be dealing with is the credibility of the RVX brand and specifically apabetalone. In my opinion a significant a part of this "story" would be talking about in depth the quality of the scientific teams involved with RVX, Zenith, apabetalone, etc. Not just saying that RVX has an 8 year lead but explaining why it will take competitors 8 years to catch up. There are also some well known patents that Don could leverage in presentations. Of course there is only 13 minutes to talk so the time must be used judiciously. I'd be emphasizing the investment opportuniies.

Since these investors are basically seeing the same message as a year ago I do not expect any serious investments to come from these events as presented... but oh would I be happy if it did!!!

There was a time in 2013 when the post hoc ASSURE and combined trial post hoc results were new, remarkable and exciting and from my perspective back then it was important to get out and tell the good scientific news.

My bottom line (for what it is worth) on presenting at conferences is that it can't hurt to be there AS LONG AS someone (whoever does this work at RVX) is back at the fort dealing with the very serious issue of the next round(s) of financing and removing the barriers to getting all of the trials moving. I hope that an RVX expert or there designated consultants are vetting and negotiating all of the LOIs and building business strategy and options to entice serious investors. Hopefully, whoever does this is narrowing down who they are going to let in.

I don't know much about the RVX and Zenith business strategies. My assumption 10 or 8 years ago was build a great drug and BP will buy you out. This could still happen sometime but we've discussed those issues thoroughly. What I see now is;

1. Develop royalty structures for apabetalone.
2. Create exclusivity rights geographically for apabetalone.
3. ??? Develop a down stream business and take apabetalone to market.
4. Try to build other licensing agreements for other compounds, the blood bank, other indications for apabetalone, etc.

Oh boy, I've rambled again.

Anyway, just my perspective.

Toinv