We can't forget that there is a need for $ coming up quickly.  A lot of hoopla to get the price up could be associated with the coming raise.

I understand what you are saying.  The release was well put together from a marketing standpoint.  But from a science standpoint this result is eye-popping!  It is certainly not conclusive....yet...and it begs for follow-up in many areas.  But for a phase 1 it is quite exciting.  My guess is that a lot of science-oriented folks will be taking start-up positions in RVX after reading today's result.

A Japanese company recently purchased my largest holding... could lightning strike twice?

(I'm okay with it!)

Yes I was at the showcase and I saw both Zenith and Resverlogix' presentations.  Nothing new in the presentations.  I asked Don about the delay associated with the second partner.  He replied that it might be due to negotiating a "bigger deal".  Nothing definite!  I asked how RVX shareholders could get into Zenith and he said to contact him...the company has the ability to sell Zenith "shares" fro m time to time.  I also posted this on another board on January 10th.

"Don told me yesterday they have enrolled close to 1200 and are now adding 100/month. Enrollment started slow and has been accelerating. There has been some lag time in the confirmation of MACE by their panel. Each event must be verified and it has taken as long as 90 days in some cases. Apparently the lag is now much shorter. As always, Don is supremely confident. Ken was also there. They are both very upbeat about this year. Who wants to take a shot at projected MACE events? "

THis was the most productive showcase I've attended, and I'm a regular.

Right.  Enrollment is a factor that can be accounted for exactly, if the pace of enrollment can be revealed.  Even if the exact dates of enrollment cannot be accounted for, a significant reduction in MACE among the test group will produce a much longer delay vs. expected rate of MACE if there were no effect.

It is actually some fairly easy arithmetic, given the data, and a bit more of a problem if parts of the data must be estimated.  I shpuld be able to calculate decent probabilities sometime after the conference.

I have to keep in mind that the longer the wait for Bet on MACE results, the better.  As I understand it the study has certain MACE milestones that trigger reporting and analysis.  If there was no positive effect (ie no change in MACE in test vs. control populations), these milestones would be hit sooner.  If the test population sees significantly fewer MACE, the study will continue for a longer period.

If I get some time I will figure out when we can expect results under selected results scenarios.  I will attempt to discuss this with RVX management next week.