Persian: A thousand nations of the Persian empire descend upon you. Our arrows will blot out the sun!
Stelios: Then we will fight in the shade.
Some weeks back, the context of HGSI, several folks including Adam Feuerstein, Jason Napodano and others engaged in a Twitter discussion about big pharma and risk-reward. Paraphrasing, valuation is paramount to big pharma; they would rather spend more later when the risk is lower.
I engaged Peter Culpepper in this "thought thread," as this approach to risk-reward is common across and very applicable to many industries and acquisition situations. While this continues to be a robust, developing thread, it was gratifying to hear Peter confirm this sentiment was seconded by pharma executives with whom he interacts.
I'd wager that Pfizer would prefer to pay $3 billion for a Provectus that has, among other things, received an SPA for a pivotal MM Phase 3 trial and an SPA for a liver Phase 2/Phase 3 trial, than $300 million for a Provectus that only has a completed MM P2 trial with no certainty of its regulatory path.
Given that large difference in valuation for what will amount to 12-18 months of time, wouldn't you say it will have been worth the wait?