We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
It does feel that Tim and Co are serious about adding substantial shareholder value and keeping us regularly up to date will help in that journey.
Lets hope this is the real deal.
Gla
Leaving out the % royalties, you put a figure of 50/50.
How do you know?
Just what 50% ownership CNRS entitled to? Equal say to who IMM allowed to do licencing deal with? Equal share of all IMM future revenues? Equal say what indications should IMM allowed to work on?
Remember you said 50/50. As I said before, you can't put a figure on it.
Supermobileman ,
Once AGAIN, i never said anything about the % of royalties so please don't put words in my moutb !
I did say on numerous occasions today NOT to confuse the Ownership of the IP with the % of royalties due to the CNRS from any revenues !
I also Said, " As far as i know, it's 50/50 OWnership of the patents "
If i am wrong, which IS of course possible , i will of course let thé board know ..
'shared jointly by CNRS' does not mean 50/50 , 75/25, 80/20 or whatever. You don't know. You can't put a percentage figure on it.
What I can say is CNRS are entitled to 12% of Immupharma's income derived form Lupuzor royalty sales (including upfront payments, milestone payments though not 100% sure on this). The 50/50 patent jointly shared did not equate to 50/50 split in income entitlement if its really that relevant.
There was nothing misleading in my message of this morning .
The CNRS are still Joint Owners of the IP /patents ...
The fact that they granted exclusive commercial rights to IMM doesn't change that fact..
IMM still needs to collaborate/negociate/ implicate/ the CNRS in any Patent strategy, Is and was the essence of my post this morning
I cannot see what you refer to as misleading or being badly researched or whatever else..
Cauldstream7,
Did you read this part ?
The patents and intellectual property rights to the full Peptide programme are shared jointly by CNRS and Immupharma France SA , a 100% subsidiary of Immupharma plc.
In light of your 'new' found knowledge, do you stand bye Your comment ?
"I don't think you are in a position to lecture people on doing their own research to check on the truth of your unchecked and unresearched statements such as your latest on CNRS and IMM"
Whatever..
Mr nolupus - in your first post this morning you agreed about the lack of detail in the RNS, and then went on to assert that immupharma are only one of the joint IP holders, while missing out obvious detail and context. You now concede that the CNRS handed over license rights many years ago, since when immupharma have paid to develop the product and consequently own the vast majority of the IP. Any suggestion that this IP is jointly and materially shared with the CNRS is highly misleading. I agree this has been a waste of time and energy, but I do not appear to be alone in believing that you are the main culprit around here. ATB
Dallo
Quite brilliant, informative and relevant posts delivered in a measured way.
Thanks.
GLA
Nolupus and Wigwammer:
Instead of trying to sort out your quarrel, why don't you read today's posts from Dallo. All the information you needed is contained in them.
Wigwammer,
I am trying to be polite but you are being an as.h.le
When you were complaining this morning that IMM had no or Limited IP protection and therefore no strategy ..
I replied to you that IMM were not alone in deciding on patent protection as they are only Co owners ..
Now , just do your own research before throwing stones !
What a waste of Time and energy
Dallo:
Your last 3 posts which provide the background to the RNS today, are indeed highly informative and interesting. Thanks for explaining about the development of peptides in treating auto-immune diseases in general and for the P140 peptide platform in particular. They are very, very helpful for long term shareholders like me who sometimes have depended more on intuition than science for holding on through all the ups and downs of IMM.
I am now well into my eighties and I wonder sometimes if success will come to IMM before I expire!
Wigwammer
Since the original patents on the P140 peptide therapies were granted 10/15 years ago there has been an exponential growth in formulations, modifications and delivery systems leading to major integration of peptides in numerous drugs including human insulin , growth hormones and many auto immune diseases.
Todays announcement reflects that advancement in technology and CNRS and Immupharma will be applying for new enhanced patent protection to cover the improvements in its own P140 formulations and delivery.
Nice £9.6k buy on the bell
Indeed nolupus. It only takes people a few minutes research to realise that your first post this morning - stating that Imm are only one of the joint holders - is highly misleading, and lacks requisite detail. The CNRS have already handed over a large part of the rights and immupharma have consequently developed the product to phase 3. From an economic pov, they own the vast majority of the IP. Your suggestion - that the IP is jointly shared - is simply misleading and semantic twaddle. ATB
So circumstances arose where the French State owned giant research institute in effect ceded the commercial rights to a major innovative drugs programme which it developed to Immupharma because of the connections of Zimmer and Muller and the need for funding from the markets with London being the then Mecca for funds for developing biotech companies rather than the moribund Paris market.
Zimmer got old and retired to Switzerland and McCarthy in fairness kept the dream alive.
He has surprised me but he must be given enormous credit for for getting Immupharma to this stage when all appeared lost.
With CNRS and Dr Muller still involved with Immupharma we should be thankful regardless of sharing patents and intellectual property and revenue sharing on future success.
Without them and the Alora Group we would be another AIM shell company or worse.
Now we have a Phase 3 Lupuzor trial, CIDP Phase 2/3 trial ( subject to funding from commercial deal) and the Anti Infection drugs plus Incanthera and valuable tax losses et al.
All for a market cap of c£10m.
Reasons to be cheerful
Cauldstream
Some of us have been here so long we cannot remember our own name!!
The CNRS ,under Dr Muller and her team , has spent tens of €millions on developing the P140 programmes and obviously being French , CNRS choose to share its scientific knowledge and intellectual property with another French company and that ultimately was Immupharma Biotech SAS in Bordeaux.
Also Robert Zimmer the founder of Immupharma was also a well known scientist in France and worked with Muller on the P140 drugs.
It has been a long and tortuous road but hopefully we are now getting closer to a major breakthrough.
I am not getting any younger!
Dallo;
Thanks for enlightening all of us on the collaboration between CNRS and IMM. It also explains why many of us invested in IMM in the first place, something that I for one tend to forget.
Long term investors in Immupharma know all about the background to the unique collaboration between CNRS , the French State fundamental research institute which is the biggest in Europe employing
33,000 people and an annual budget of €5 billion.
Dr Sylvane Muller and other scientists in CNRS developed the P140 Peptide programme over 14 years ago and CNRS granted Immupharma exclusive worldwide rights to commercialise the resultant drug discoveries including Lupuzor and CIDP.
The patents and intellectual property rights to the full Peptide programme are shared jointly by CNRS and Immupharma France SA , a 100% subsidiary of Immupharma plc.
CNRS has affiliations with major research institutions worldwide including the top Universities and continues to work closely with Immupharma and Avion on the Lupuzor trials and on the CIDP and Anti Infections drugs and in return will receive a % of future revenues on commercialisation of the drugs
The % is assumed to be c20% but in the context of today's RNS on enhancing the intellectual property rights , I see the CNRS input to be crucial to expedite the matter.
To have the CNRS as our research partner is unprecedented for a small AIM Biotech company and if its support leads to successful outcomes for the P140 platform in multi billion $ markets then shareholders will not worry if the CNRS revenue share is higher than 20% or so.
And i stick to that ..supermobileman
50-50 Ownership With the CNRS
Then the CNRS accepted to out license their part to Immupharma for a % of any future revenues.
Anyway, all it takes Anyone IS a few minutes research if they want to DYOR
Nolupus,
You don't know the truth. You are making it up as you go along. It's you who dug the hole and now you're trying to wiggle your way out.
You said it was 50/50 shared ownership of patent with CNRS.
Nolupus.
Shame on all of us who are unfairly bashing you.
So now we can expect silence from you; as you say, it's not worth the effort.
Shame, we just can't seem to keep the daily gains. What will it take to get over 3p
Just goes to show that nobody wants to know the truth but a lot just want to Bash nolupus but whatever..
Not worth the effort ...
Immupharma holders can rest assured that the vast majority of whatever economic value sits with those patents belongs to them. And don’t let some duplicitous bore with a weird hang up distract you from this point. ATB
Nolupus
You tell us - haven't you done your own research?