Finally, a moment to catch up with the board with a stream of consciousness in response to various posts. I apologize in advance for its length and decline the non-humanitarian investor’s (see Mess. #26311 and 26321) recent invitation that I "hit the road". This board is for different opinions and viewpoints concerning Enzo. It is not merely a vehicle to facilitate abusive, vulgar and illegal conduct to amuse a few. What follows is my opinion based on my own experience. Naturally, it may be adjusted and/or refuted by others – but, hopefully, contesting views will not just be those of empty vessels of great (and sometimes rude) sound, without more.
VANGO888 – You may want to check on it, but I believe the HEP B medication regime calls for oral tolerization medication every third or fourth day during the trial period and not just medication on the first 5 days. Phase II will no doubt see adjustments in dosage on a person by person basis.
As you say, tolerization is not genetic antisense. It also does not use a vector, although I appreciate your attempt to illustrate its targeted focus by alluding to a single destination vector. As you know, the HEP B tolerization medication works on surface antigens re: the liver; and the tolerization principle is applicable to prevent death and internal damage in a host of diseases that are caused by immune system reactions to infections, etc. – perhaps, even to SEPSIS.
IMO the October conference in Dallas, Texas, will be an important one for Enzo, both in terms of presentation and release of much more HEP B trial and other tolerization information. Finally, IMO, the cost of HEP B tolerization medication should be kept as low as possible so it remains affordable worldwide. Volume sales can make up for the usual company practice of restricted expensive sales -- followed eventually by cheaper generic distribution by every tom, dick and harry for their own profit.
LCBard, Genethry, Ken, et al. -- We probably agree on a lot of things re: Enzo, but adopt different approaches based on our own experiences with respect to the how, why and wherefore of attaining goals.
I spent a lot of time in initial years agonizing over what I then thought was slow progress in the upward movement of the stock price. I was forced to remember constantly I had not bought the stock because of Enzo’s clinical lab or diagnostics work, but because of its potential to pursue and find/create the Holy Grail. I spent years assisting individuals and their friends and relatives to deal with all financial, personal care, medical decision-making and other pre-and-post death issues encompassed in events surrounding medical/physical and psychiatric disease and disabilities. It was very hard to see so many suffer and/or die and then still have to assist the adversely affected survivors.
As time and Enzo’s science progressed it became even harder to stay focused and not let the futility of the suffering and death embitter me. Hoping that Enzo would get the science right the first time became my primary obsession; enjoying the pecuniary fruits of its labor became secondary – probably because the first helps billions of very needy human beings, and the second is, IMO, inevitable and ongoing.
IMO Enzo eventually demonstrated – at least to my reasonable satisfaction -- that, collectively, it had the brains, creativity, sticktoitness, organization and professional determination to succeed. This realization helped me keep my own quotient of impatience in control. I, too, acknowledged and constantly have to remind myself that reaching for and developing new and workable scientific solutions is a slow, intense, methodical march forward of small steps, re-tests, checks, balances, regulatory and professional compliance, financial, brain and person power until the point is reached where replication is certain and can be generally understood, accepted and speeded up by some degree of automation.
IMO, in order to solve genetic and incurable viral disease the world needs more Enzo-type companies and scientists that have the integrity to pursue cures, etc., and not just interim quasi-treatments that fill the coffers, sometimes have other side effects and toxicities that require even more ongoing and expensive additional treatments. I remind myself that the Enzo founders and scientists could probably have made more money and obtained upfront golden parachute guarantees had they worked for others or different agendas rather than risk taking the route Enzo did. The reason why they can’t or won’t Dance to others’ tunes or agendas is also the possible reason they will be successful in their current endeavors.
Think about it: If Enzo’s way of working produces the type of scientific successes it has and will continue to score, why on earth should I want them to start operating under the assembly-line rubric of others’ models or agendas? The fruit would sour and the blossoms die! Moreover, IMO there are rational reasons for the business judgments they are making at this time. We are, essentially, along for the ride on Enzo’s train; but it is Enzo’s journey, its navigation and its destination. If , on balance, it doesn’t please us, this is America and we can alight from Enzo’s train at any time and get a ticket to a different destination on someone else’s choo choo.
As Enzo’s founders would benefit most from precipitous out-of-space cosmos destinations for its stock price, Enzo must have a solid and good business judgment reason for operating the way it is with limited publicity at this time. Enzo could opt to go private and then public again at a later time, as others have done so as to gain absolute control. But why push it? Let Enzo do its thing its way.
If the Enzo management needs more time (without the distractions and other negative events that can emanate from publicity) to systematically achieve and secure the loose ends of its goals – for the good of all -- SO BE IT!! We are so close after such a long time. What’s a few more months in the whole scheme of things – especially if Enzo gets it right the FIRST time.
If I criticize activities of persons accomplishing something I personally do not have the talent to do, I try hard to be fair and to learn as much of the pertinent facts as I can before engaging in the personal or group rhetoric. Even then I sometimes miss something and screw up and there are innumerable people ready to jump into the fray. Mostly, I remember that criticism is not constructive. At best, it is merely observation by eyes of a third party – perhaps without full information -- with a predisposition to see that which they already believe or wish to see. Everyone sees with his or her own slant and it takes real effort to try to view from the same perspective as that of the person(s) being criticized.
Let me try to respond with greater specificity to part of your respective posts.
LC you said:
"In the past, much ENZ news has … been released in a hap-hazard, unprofessional and overly technical manner and even via media outlets (West Coast radio station with Internet connections) that are NOT representative of a NYSE LISTED COMPANY."
"Fact: ENZ became listed in December [1999] on the most prestigious exchange in the world, the NYSE, with the least amount of publicity (read virtually NONE) I’ve ever seen."
"Fact: the initial HEP B news was released and ignored during a sector crash…now that’s timing of the WORST kind."
"Fact: Predictions (NO, read that as promises), have been made to ENZ shareholders that have NOT been fulfilled on a TIMELY BASIS…specifically, those made at the most recent ASM."
"… NOW, IS AN IDEAL TIME TO RELEASE NEWS for a maximum near term market impact."
Genethry: Your comments re: IB retention and research, etc.
Re: ENZ News:- I have always received a fax of news as soon as it is released. I had my name placed on PR Andreder’s list. The mailed copy thereof arrives later. Enzo simultaneously releases news to shareholders, Dow Jones, Bizwire, Reuters, Bloomberg, and a host of other news, business and healthcare-related outlets. If its releases are picked up by the recipients (their choice), copies thereof become available on numerous Internet and TV sites.
Before the news is released it must be vetted by other people for factual accuracy, its legality, for FDA, SEC, etc., regulatory compliance and /or approval, when required, etc.
Forward looking statements must be safe harbored by a general notification implying in effect that they may not be construed by readers as absolute and immutable truths and promises. Obviously, not all future events are within Enzo’s contol – e.g., they may involve customer/partner issues, employee matters, directives of courts, agencies, etc., new developments, force majeure, and so on.
Each industry/specialty has its own TECHNICAL LANGUAGE – be it engineering, electronics, computer, medical, science, etc. Its use conveys a definition accepted by others in the relevant field. Use of technical language is appropriate to keep down the occurrences of misapprehension and diverse interpretations and to maintain a high degree of consistency in developing and conforming industry and other standards, including subsequent legal and/or specialty administrative determinations. There is no need of technical-type language if the release merely notifies of a change of address and/or similar-type data.
Some shareholders understand the technical specialty; others teach themselves sufficient background over time to be able to digest much of what they read. Others have relatives, accountants, friends and consultants translate or interpret financial and technical language if the depth of interest in the investment’s business is of such a degree to warrant it.
Brokers receiving releases are frequently prohibited by internal brokerage house rules from promoting stocks of companies that are not paying clients of the employer-brokerage house. IMO if the brokers promoted stocks based on the stock’s own merit there would be many more rich clients instead of rich brokerage houses. IBs addressed below.
Re: West Coast station:- The West Coast station was a television (not just a radio) station and viewed in the greater Los Angeles and surrounding areas. The video was simultaneously broadcast over the Internet and then archived. Many shareholders across the country who cannot attend ASMs saw Barry Weiner for the first time and were impressed by his presentation and message. Many West Coast viewers were pleased at BW’s fourth appearance on their show. Some may have participated in the HIV1+ Phase I human trial on the West Coast, while others bought Enzo shares on the Pacific and other regional exchanges and not in New York.
Every bit of free publicity helps to get the word out. Personally, I believe some of fhe TV and Internet viewers probably recalled Enzo’s tolerization process when they heard of Eli Lilly’s proposed new drug (18 to 24 months away if it is approved) to treat symptoms of SEPSIS, which kills and maims tens of thousands of post-surgery and other patients each year. The EL drug has not been identified as a cure for full-blown SEPSIS – a condition where the individual’s immune system reacts to an infection in such an excessive way as to seriously damage and kill off bodily organs. So far some 30 other clinical trials failed to find a cure for Sepsis. More business for Enzo!
Re: Timing of HEP B Release:- Enzo is required by law to release accurate and material information as promptly as possible. It may not massage or withhold it to suit or manipulate market conditions. A failure to so act puts Enzo in legal jeopardy.
Re: NYSE Listing Publicity:- I agree Enzo did not get as much publicity from its December 1999 NYSE listing as it deserved and as is usual. But was Enzo to blame? Not IMO.
Enzo applied for listing and the ball moved to the NYSE court to approve its eligibility and date of listing. While it is true that newly listed companies usually get televised ringing the market’s opening bell, it is not always the case. NYSE dedicated many days in December 1999 to honoring persons it believed had distinguished themselves in various areas. The banners and bell ringing on such days are for the honorees. On Enzo’s listing day, NYSE honored a well-known Nazi death camp survivor who has dedicated much of his life to identifying and tracing Nazis guilty of war atrocities.
Enzo’s management was, however, on the NYSE floor. They interviewed with several TV stations, among others. Some of the interviews screened that day and later; others presumably ended on the cutting room floor. Releases went to shareholders and all others mentioned above. IMO Enzo has received increased attention since it listed in December 1999.
Re: IBs and Other Business Judgments:- Based on my own observations and investigation, IMO Enzo’s management passes muster. Its managerial foresight is such that pre-planning occurs and suitable contacts are made which can be activated at times most propitious to Enzo’s development and, therefore, to its shareholders long time good.
The law requires management (not shareholders) to make IB and other business judgments based on a variety of factors and not just the enrichment of shareholders in any given time. Shareholders can vote out the Board of Directors and thwart other issues if they control the correct number of shares. Such an ouster here may well also eject the creative business, dedicated service and scientific talent.
IMO Enzo will retain the services of an IB at some point. At this stage, Enzo is close to being able to do so based on its own terms and needs and not as a needy supplicant vulnerable to being tossed around and/or marketed to other clients of the IB primarily for the IB’s pecuniary benefit. Personally, I would like to see Enzo remain an independent entity until it at least perfects its science, gets it approved and into the market. IMO it’s the logical way to retain direction and integrity. Enzo is not just producing another product. Its science may upset the apple carts of many diverse entities and groups. It should not be swept under the rug for the convenience, etc., of such others.
IBs can serve a useful purpose when the timing and terms are right. Sometimes they do not. This may be the case in conflict of interest situations where the new client’s interests are not the paramount interests of the IB, which are predominated by the needs of another bigger/richer client or the IBs own internal issues/problems. Thus, it is important to let Enzo decide on the if, who, what, when, why, how and timing of any such relationship and its extent. Not all companies allegedly assisted by IBs survive or are successful. Many get abandoned as their castles built on sand get swept out to sea.
IMO Enzo’s financial situation is not that complicated to require intensive research and any researcher would have to be educated by Enzo to even begin to adequately deal with its science and proposed markets. Entities that use financial criteria as the basis for investment decisions will not necessarily be swayed to buy Enzo stock at this point in time. When it becomes apparent to the company that the FDA will approve Enzo’s science for marketing, then an educated IB can assist others to understand its full potential (scientifically and financially) and help promote funding, contracts, stock price, etc.
Methinks, however, that even prior to FDA approvals, Enzo will not have difficulty in getting celebrities to announce their personal Enzo cures, etc., via worldwide networks – and all for free. Then watch the IBs and PR types scramble to pound on Enzo’s door
LESSON: Get the science done; get it right the first time; protect it; and get it approved for maximum application. The publicity will be free, voluntary, overwhelming, and well deserved. Wonderful things will happen for all.
Re: ASMs, etc.:- I have attended several ASMs. IMO, Enzo’s word has generally proved reliable. Perhaps my ability to distinguish between a report of a known and existing/verifiable fact and a prospective forward-looking statement that cannot then be verified, time-lined or assured leaves me less vulnerable to unjustified expectations. Because of the tenuousness of forward-looking plans not under Enzo’s sole control, it is a given-- right up front -- that cancellations, adjustments in game plans and expectations will likely be required.
If Enzo may only make reference to past, written in stone, facts -- so as to be safe from a legal liability point of view -- and may not refer in a general manner to its hopes, goals, current intentions, future research attempts, etc., then why have a meeting at all. We can read about past events and facts in print.
Re: MARKET RIPENESS, Etc.:- Everyone’s opinion is welcome, but only Enzo’s counts on this issue. My irrelevant opinion is that I am not convinced "NOW is the time to release news for a maximum near term market impact" on Enzo’s stock trajectory. I see perpetuation of negative FOMC psychology and other national and world factors of sufficient magnitude to keep the markets flopping around for a while. In addition, Enzo cannot prematurely release or make up new news, and it has released what it can to date.
When Enzo gets its ducks securely in a row, perhaps it will release an ongoing stream of news of sufficient quantity to even satisfy both the addicted junkie news cravings of many board posters and those unrealistic expectations of short term traders whose sole interest is in a quick profit via short, long, options, computer off-market betting, etc. (To each his/her own).
It will take Enzo some additional time to do what good business judgement dictates it should currently do to shore up its foundations, protect its valuables, and meet the stresses of future expansion.
My vote is to give Enzo’s management the time it needs and thereby not jeopardize others future medical conditions, their lives, and my personal and pecuniary rewards. But that’s just my opinion.
INDEPENDENCE and COOPERATION! Have a HAPPY JULY 4TH.