The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register 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.
Ghia is a wind up merchant, just here for attention IMHO !!
Roll on the results RNS so we have some facts to discuss !
GLA!
That’s quite a change from your last post proclaiming finances isn’t a problem we just need to see the plan Ghia?
Your previous view would seems to have ruled out option 3 or have you changed your view?
Not sure why you haven't include the scenario where they can't make any announcements due to commercial sensitivity. They will, as most will agree, be the minor partner in any such scenari,o and won't therefore be at liberty to dictate any comms output. That will be a consensus matter. That will be dictated by bigger player/s. I think this is an option as worthy of consideration as others imho.
So the hires of CFO, CMO, FC and some clinical trial peeps before Christmas was for what exactly? Fun? Please explain the logic.
I find it concerning that the narrative here is so
Blinkered, strong parallels with the closing days of many AIM stock of the past.
Just to be clear there are 3options not the 2options that Tommy is so keen to present.
1 - They have info and are deliberately witholding (Fanciful)
2 - They are not ready to divulge as they don’t have all the info yet ( this is the optimists view fingers crossed)
3 - They have nothing to say because sadly things are not progressing as they had hoped (a distinct possibility that cannot be ignored)
XEL had proven reserves of North Sea oil and a technique to extract they never made it. Yet in the final days it was their job not to admit this and to remain positive.
We have a drug that we are pretty confident works and a delivery method… It’s the boards job to attempt to commercialise it right until the end.
Noli potestatem neglegere stultorum cunctorum.
Certe !
Haha thanks Mani. Quandoque bonus dormitat Homerus. I'll post it again tomorrow evening
Doc.Dan
Tomorrow is a Bank Holiday!!!!!
RNS tomorrow anyone ?
Not many more weeks to pass before starting in H1 becomes an impossibility. They have a max of one month more before it becomes very difficult to meet the twice delayed deadline.
Fairly certain there'll be a big Clinical Programme update announcing they're about to start first, as they did with Sprinter when there was a similar amount of new information to divulge, and they will then need at least 2 weeks ( if prior trialing timescales are followed: SG016 2 weeks - Sprinter 3 and a half weeks ) before FPD.
I also think it's possible that they fire the gun on just one trial even though they said everything would start together, as they're under pressure to get something started, and they may be waiting for something significant that is not in their control to get one of them underway.
I can't see any possibility that they fob us off though. The sp would nosedive even further if there is not a significant and convincing update.
Tommy
I have never said that... What I have said is that I think it
would be better to do a JV/Deal after our P2's when we
have a stronger negotiating position. If we are forced
to do a deal beforehand because of a lack of funds, then
we will be at the mercy of a BP and they will take full advantage!
We have been told we have enough to do our planned P2's
and I hope this is the case, this is the wrong time to do a deal IMHO!
We need conclusive results and a good deal to do a P3.... In 2022
at the AGM RM famously talked about throwing darts to explore
opportunities.... Well he failed as nothing materialised.... My
other worry is that RM will not be able to negotiate a deal that suits him and
we will be watching from the sidelines as he and our overstaffed
team drain our remaining cash in wages and pension contributions...
If there is one mention of still working at pace/haste in our results
update we are in trouble! As I have said many times RM has a conflict
of interest... Throw everything at our P2's and hope for success or
play the long game and protect his huge salary for a few more years..
My gut instinct says we will be told they are waiting for the final
UNIVERSAL results in order to finalise the design of our trials..
They will sell it as the prudent thing to do.....IMHO!
W
The big problem Mani has with the assertion that BP won’t enter into a deal until we’ve done a P2 is the fact Astra Zeneca already did just that in 2015.
At that point all we had was a tiny proof of concept trial. Now we have data from global trials.
BP to all kinds of caveat deals tiered to results at different stages.
This probably doesn’t fit with Mani’s desperate attempts to so negative positions.
I don't know where you get this " we won't get a deal before the P2s deliver" rehetoric? Where does it state that as a pre-requisite to a deal? Nowhere other than your head is the answer. Plenty of Biotechs strike deals before P2's. I've stated the reasons below why/ the obvious advantages to BP's in striking early. We have a pile of accumulated data (including safety), culminating with the most recent USHSA brief in Edinburgh on in vitro testing of SNG001, and everything else in between. The 100 days mission talks of "P2 Ready" candidates, not post-P2 candidates. Important distinction. I suggest you read the latest pdf of "100 Days Mission to Respond to Future Pandemic Threats" report. It'll be online if you look.
"Note that GSK acquired a 10 percent stake in CureVac for £130 million and provided a cash payment of £104 million to fund R&D. "
Hardly comparable. "Under the terms of the deal, GSK will make an equity investment in CureVac of £130m (€150m), representing close to a 10% stake, an upfront cash payment of £104m (€120m) and a one-time reimbursable payment of £26m (€30m) for manufacturing capacity reservation. "
Curevac's then Mcap of $1.3billion ( it rose to $5.4b ) versus Synairgen's current value of £13.5m plus cash & patents
The best we can hope is something like the very good deal that was made with AZ - but we won't get a deal before the P2s deliver and unless they're stellar it won't be a favorable deal.
Whether funds last this long is anyone's guess. Didn't the company say financials were good until at least September '24. Was this in the interim report or Q&A at the AGM ? Either way - when it was made it was with the expectation that the P2s would be done or almost done by September - and now of course that's impossible
Fruits
I said "if" so how is that true or false?? Get a grip!
Any deal with a BP will be waited in favour of the BP,
Milestone payments are common but they protect the BP,
they are limiting their risk. Seriously, what BP would leave
RM to run things if they invested? His track record is appalling..
Took too many risks on SPRINTER succeeding, we are still paying
staff with no job role... Board all took a 100% bonus from the placing
for what??? RM will be negotiating any possible deal... Will he turn down
a good deal if it leaves his position unsecured??? Yes IMHO! We are
a minnow in the Ocean full of sharks... With RM at the helm..
Water, water, every where,
And all the boards did shrink;
Water, water, every where,
Nor any drop to drink.
"if we Partner and give away a significant portion of the company away"
That is not true. Not all collaborations are equal.
What are the equally possible alternative scenarios here?
While Nasdaq listing is an option for a Biotech, it is not the ONLY option. Companies also have to qualify or this.
Synairgen need to consider how they will manage future cash flow requirements beyond SNG001 which surely will not remain their only 'product' once it's on it's way. A mutually beneficial collaboration with BP/BPs is an attractive option. BPs are always on the lookout for ways to replenish their pipeline, and can be willing to pay generously for investments in innovative biotech companies. They can hedge their bets by gambling on earlier stage Biotech to avoid higher price/ competition for an asset at a later stage. Equally, the technical and financial input from BP can help to speed up progress (for clinical trials in our case) and, if successful, lead to potentially generous milestone payments.
Another alternative to a collaboration could be an equity investment by a BP/BPs. This would not only allow Synairgen to retain control over its daily operations, it would also replenish the coffers. That structure suits BP because it would again allow them to hedge their bets by making multiple investments, spreading any risk. Note that GSK acquired a 10 percent stake in CureVac for £130 million and provided a cash payment of £104 million to fund R&D.
The P
You are right, but if we Partner and give away a significant
portion of the company away in a deal TGF would no
longer have control. We are not in a good negotiating
position without conclusive P2 results, and if we do not have
enough funds, then we have limited options. TGF will
no doubt look after their significant investment here,
that may or may not benefit us. But as things stand
TGF are locked in as much as we are, I think it all
hinges on our finances and ability to do P2's without
a partner/fundraise of some sort..If we clearly cannot
start trials due to a lack of funds then that is a serious
issue for all invested...
Manifesto.
Under AIM rules, 75% of all shareholders need to be in favour before delisting can happen. For obvious reasons, that scenario is not an option for the CEO and BOD to consider.
Even if the vast majority of private investors were favourably inclined towards delisting , TFG Holdings with their 28.3% shareholding, are in effective control of the process.
Many CEO's give regular updates, even when there is nothing
significant to report, and shareholders have a right as owners
of the company, to expect to be kept updated. Tommy, there has
never been a suggestion from SNG that we need to Partner for our P2's,
we have been told we have sufficient funds. I imagine RM
would like a Partner as that would mean existing funds last longer
even though we would have to give away a large slice of the pie!
I genuinely worry that RM and the Board will put their finances
ahead of shareholder interest. We cannot go onto the NASDAQ
as we do not come near the criteria to apply. The big question
raised is the one of delisting, and that is a concern as it
would be a disaster for us trying to sell. I think if that were suggested
the SP would tank as many try to get out. TGF will have a view on it,
but I doubt they could stop it. I note the CEO of SuperDry has also
recently suggested delisting and PI's are furious... As RM seems
to find PI's an irritation, nothing would surprise me, but I really
hope that is not on the cards!
There are two obvious points on communication although one is more fanciful than the other.
Either they know and are deliberately withholding information from shareholders. I’m guessing you can figure out which one that is, or they are just not ready yet.
Whether or not you’re happy with them not being ready depends on how realist your views are about the timeframes that drug development takes.
I’m happy to wait and our case remains a strong one. BP and government bodies don’t care how impatient you are for progress on trials or JV’s. They move when they’re ready.
We had a healthy financial balance at the last interims and the trials haven’t started yet so our financial situation should still be good. We just need partners for the next phase. I’m confident those partners exist
You'll get another chance in a couple of months Doc. It'll then be a whole year with just one 4 minute Proactive interview from our CEO. An interview in which the interviewer seemed to think Synairgen had a new drug.
Posting again for new shareholders who won't know who he is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3gJ9cP7fC8
I was chatting to someone the other day who holds E-Therapeutics (ETX). They have decided to delist and might have a go for the Nasdaq in the US. But in the meantime it will be very hard to trade shares as they’ll provide a simple matched bargain facility. Not great news for holders over there who are livid.
My big concern has always been that Synairgen do something similar, because clearly they don’t have the time of day for shareholders. I also recall the AGM last year when I asked RM directly about comms and the lack of, and he looked at me confused and not appreciative of the suggestion!
Trolls? Marsden has created this 'hate' culture towards the company.
Based on the current position of the company, it only points to failure.
Do I want the company to succeed? Yes.
Do I think the board of directors hate shareholders? Yes.