| re: That’s actually a positive sign |
| Posted by: ryhog 03:07 pm EST 02/18/22 |
| In reply to: That’s actually a positive sign - dramedy 02:49 pm EST 02/18/22 |
|
| I agree it is a positive sign but I never thought they wouldn't. Staying in hiatus has not-insignificant costs associated with it and I do not think McCollum would have spent that money unless he thought there were greater than even odds that he would reopen. I also agree about the timing in relation to the putative cutoff. |
|
reply
|
|
| Previous: |
That’s actually a positive sign - dramedy 02:49 pm EST 02/18/22 |
| Next: |
re: That’s actually a positive sign - hanon 07:40 pm EST 02/18/22 |
| Thread: |
|
