"If however a company you owned dropped a few hundred million...

"If however a company you owned dropped a few hundred million into a R&D program, they may also like to give you an update every so often to let you know all is going to plan and would more likely than not inform you that an interim test went well."

I own shares in several companies that invest in R&D.
None of them provide their shareholders updates that simply confirm what the market would have been assuming/expecting already.


"And once again you may not agree but there are reasonable explanations out there for why the three partnerships ended or didn’t proceed."

Committed shareholders with confirmation biases can cast these situations in whatever pastel of light they wish, but to the marginal investor - the one who does not yet own MSB but who might own it, and who is therefore the potential antidote to MSB's share price woes - it is not a good look.

Put yourself in the shoes of someone who has just come across MSB and who looks back that the sequence of events regarding Teva, Celgene and Mallinkdroft:

1. Before Teva pulled out, MSB management provided numerous assurances of Teva's ongoing commitment. But then Teva pulled out;

2. They have left the entire Celgene situation up in the air, with not even a hint of an explanation to the market of what transpired;

3. Why did they even entertain the notion of partnership discussions with Mallinkdroft when it was patently clear that Mallinkrodt barely had two nickels to invest in addressing the challenges in its own business, let alone provide meaningful funding for MSB?

People complain about the share price, but surely you can see that to prospective investors, this sort of thing raises more questions than answers?