While I am all for an Attentive DRE to shake up a somnambulant mangement & board, I am not yet persuaded that the trio proposed, in the absence of any clear policy/objectives, is the right choice. As the share price has fallen from $6 to $0.20 we have vented our ire at the agonizing delays at GPRO. You are entitled to read evil intentions in such delays or even a conspiracy to swallow CUR at dirt cheap prices. I see them as a simple order of priorities. For CUR it is a life and death matter as it is our only test. For GPRO, Progensa is just one test among many and was fifth on their priority list. And those many other tests make them oodles of money.
The reference to the number of labs (or lack thereof) puzzled me as well. Especially when I noticed that Bostwick had been dropped. But the strategy at GPRO may well be to target urologists' offices and small and medium sized clinics rather than large reference labs. Why else would they train literally hundreds of urologists/physicians and designate them as PCA3 experts in countries all around the world. Their names and locations are published at the PCA3 web site. US (62). UK (94). Brazil (14). France (19). China (12) India (9). Germany (60). South Africa (8). UAE (4). Egypt(7). Turkey (17). Israel (6). Netherlands (25). Belgium (47). Switzerland (22). Taiwan (2). etc etc.
Again at the current share price CUR may be a tempting target for any group with deep pockets and we have heard these rumblings from south of the border before. But then that is why we have a poison pill on the shelf.