Cobus Loots, CEO of Pan African Resources, on delivering sector-leading returns for shareholders. Watch the video 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.
Papertub, I basically agree with what you're saying. I also think timescales are going to be drawn out. They may never achieve what they're hoping to commercially.
The problem is that they stated that assays had basically been optimized, and it was time for clinical trials and then commercialization.
Now they're saying something totally different.
Labouring a point here, but I think we're at a stage where we all need to know what's going on.
Papertub. Step 1 has been done multiple times. There are literally published papers from years ago with the results (youll find it somewhere in my posting history). Allan even cites the 95% accurate test in one of his interviews.
The scale up is the requirement to commercialise, and the reported breakthrough last Aug was being able to run this in an automated platform. A month later they announced that Biotechne Jess machine would be the one they use.
So i think you are quite far off the mark.
The scale up of the reagents production js necessry, and then the test accuracy needs to assessed again using those scaled up reagents and with the standard operating procedures specified, to get to the cited test numbers.
Now i doubt that they would product reagents at commercial scale without already knowing they work from internal trials. But you still have to verify them in the clinical tests formally.
Where i think you are correct is that any institution or large biotech companies will be waiting on the results of the scales up trials.
Ps what makes you think it's just one private investor in the fundraise?
If so, it's a sign of confidence, but I doubt it's just one person. I concur that future funding will almost definitely be needed, but I think these shares will be flipped - and if so, another black mark against Ciz.
We'll see on that one.
Exactly Brond - so the question is : How do we get Ciz to tell us the truth about what's happening?
I think the science works… if you’ve tested it in conjunction with Bio-Techne on Jess, that has to test that you are getting the right results…a $10bn+ business isn’t going to risk reputational damage by RNSing something they can’t stand behind.
However, the question remains why are they partnering Proteogenix - we must have highlighted 20+ possible reasons, but we just need clarification.
It appears that they have now settled on the mAbs and reagents, however high level back story is important.
“…enter into the manufacturing and scale up of key antibodies and reagents”
Then this part suggests it’s an IP thing…
“…new antibodies from this development programme should extend the range and proprietary rights that the Company has for detecting the CIZ1B Biomarker”
Proprietary rights…@the legal rights of an entity to own tangible or intangible property”
Could it be that Proteogenix would manufacture but the licencing rights sit with Cizzle, whereas one of the other partners wanted to retain title?? Therefore Cizzle switched to keep greater IP protection?
Just on the proprietary piece…asking a company like Bio-Techne…US legal team of a $10bn org…can you design and manufacture this mAb for us but we want full title on it…can’t see that working out well…might be why they’ve looked elsewhere (recognise nothing with bio-techne was set in stone re mAbs, reagents)…
A lot of supposition there Green, but that's all we are left with.
"I think the science works", you say. Maybe.."A 10B business isn't going to risk reputational damage by RNSing something they can't stand behind"..you added
Again, maybe.
Maybe that was true at that point within limits but it didn't go far enough. Maybe Ciz version doesn't tally with Biotechne, maybe something has subsequently changed.
We don't know..
And again.
We SHOULD be informed. Since we had no idea of Biotechne (in the positive), Ciz is setting an unsettling precedent of only releasing news that suits them.
Unfortunately this works to the negative too.
Openness and accurate updates are the key to trust, else we are just flailing in the dark.
Hi TT…all pretty much supposition at this point in absence of confirmed info from Cizzle, and with you that they should be providing greater transparency (even with context of NDAs, IP protection etc….)
On the Bio-Techne RNS- I work a lot with our investor relations team (EUR 20bn MC), nothing goes out without multiple checks, and that’s in the UK, US must be even more conscientious. If they say it works, I think that’s a given - granted sensitivity / specificity / PPV / NPV will show how efficacious it is…but they’re not putting their name to it unless it’s comparable with industry standards…