Member Info for Brondby

I've always said there is risk. We are essentially betting on the test results being good, and that ciz can get it to market, either directly, through licensing, or through buyout.

If there was no risk, this share would already have done its x10.

I think the risk reward here is still fantastic.

But DYOR, as everyone has differnet risk perception,

different assessment of CoS and different ability or preparedness to lose money if things don't work out.

GLA. Back to sleep for me until next RNS...

No I think you'll find they do.

Why else is Behnke so keen to sign up to this before the trial results are known?

Because he knows that once the results are known, there will be a stream of pharma suitors queuing up, for this. He wants in early.

Hi TechT,

I've been quiet lately as didn't seem much point in posting now we have a sequence of events set out. I've rather parked this one to a weekly check until things start moving again or we get an update.

"hope it doesn't mean that Ciz's position isn't battered down more - since Ciz appears to have little leverage in this"

I don't think the position has been battered down at all.

A 15% royalty exchanged for a 10% royalty plus a 10% equity stake in Bio Inc, upfront payments, all US dev funded, and retaining rights to rest of world. I much prefer that arrangement! A nice tasty nasdaq listing down the line, and a slice of a co that will be valued in multiples of revenue.

Secondly. Ciz hold ALL the cards. Its our reagents, our test, our IP, and we've just raised funds and have shares in CDT so are not short of cash. If ciz bio dont want it, someone else will.

Of course, as it always has done, success will depend on the accuracy. But both parties appear to be proceeding on the assumption it will be good, and i dont think you get to that position through hope alone.

Definitely has been a dent in confidence from the raise RNS (I suspect Allan was shocked, but the impact on the sp has, I hope, taught him a lesson. Its probably the first "bad" news he's had to deliver, and wasn't really bad at all, just unexpected! To raise in a way that way, not with E3, and at marginally lower rate, came totally out of the blue. Markets being the way they are right now, don't like shocks like that. And the expectation created that triials were already underway. I suspect the rIse was to ensure a strong negotiating position, and some existing holders wanted to maintain their holding (a sign of confidence IMO).

On the plus side, I have moved my general trading account holding into my ISA and now have a lower average than ever. If it drops further I'll be buying even more.

So I've been out all day from early so have missed all the action. Just been reading up now, and some initial thoughts...

- lower royalities than previously suggested, but perhaps greater certainty of revenue stream and lower risk for ciz

- retain benefis of any improvements to the test for elsewhere in the world. Definitely a plus.

- BioTechne buyout now seems unlikely short-term, but...

- US high net worth individuals will be keen for either a buyout of BIO, or Nasdaq listing down the line. Ciz has 10% of that prospect.

- the $100k up front suggests to me they already know the test results are good, or they suspect its good and we will know within 120 days. Benkhe won't bust his reputation with those folk selling them a pup.

- sets ciz up well for Europe, once the test is moving in the US. Rinse and repeat.

Questions

- does this relate to the LDT only, or also any point of care test?

Market didn't seem to like it much. Probably a combination of folk who were in for a quick buyout exiting, and the fact there is still no.

accuracy, specificity, etc.

All in all, good. If it remains sub 2p for long enough to make nexts years ISA year, I'll be adding.

"simply a file recycle and someone too lazy to change the file name. Nothing more."

I'd rate oapk20s suggest much more likely than this hogbog. Harder to recycle a filename than start afresh. And a recycle of what exactly?

Well if we're going for tenuous links oapk20, try googling "lung cancer london" and go to maps.

Notice anything?

Like i say, my bet is a codename for the placing, but it may have been chosen due to links to lung cancer, or there could be other reasons. We shouldn't have to be guessing stuff like this.

Neil, do you mean there is mention of Marlyebone in the para under General (as I can't see any).

Or do you mean this set of text has never appeared in a ciz RNS previously? I think that is likely added by Allenby Capital, as similar text appears on this recent placing Allenby did for East Imperial plc.

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/EISB/proposed-placing-to-raise-approximately-ps325-000/16302105

The download file from the cizzle webside is called Project_Marylebone_Placing_Announcement_FINAL

IMO, most likely a codename for talking about the placing itself, but neilin is noting that its the first to include anything that is not just a straight description of the announcement. So could in theory also relate to a funding to support some project called Marylebone.

In fact, increases market for a cheap blood test to screen the population for early.stage cancer, then some of those (who can afford it) will get a vaccine personalised for them.

Absolutely FastFood. If Widglide thinks this is the competition, then he's barking up the wrong tree.

Years away, currently.more about post cancer reoccurrence prevention, prohibitively expensive in the medium term for widespread roll out. Maybe in 15 years.

Lol, zmoderna and Merck

"

Still, Hoge said that even with the new data it would be some time before the companies can file for approval of the treatment.

The vaccine is custom-built based on an analysis of a patient's tumors after surgical removal. The vaccines are designed to train the immune system to recognize and attack specific mutations in cancer cells."

"it’s clear other companies are far ahead of the game and they are so close to a preventative vaccine"

Name them.

I think the problem is that the RNSs can be interpreted multiple way.

Ciz never said they were starting clinical trials. They said they had passed key milestones to begin trials, and thay they had commenced trials design.

As I've said before, the final trials need to use exactly the same kit, processes and reagents that will be used in production. So that means they do need to start production of reagenets at scale. Thats my understanding. Others interpret differently.

And that is the problem. The RNSs tend to be vague and lacking full explanation. Thats what needs to change.

I dont want messagees between the company and individuals and shareholder reps and secret Telegram groups. I want RNSs that are clear and explantitiv and follow up interviews that are more than just a replay of the RNS.

The last RNS could be fantastic news (scaling up for production in weeks, extension of reagents to other cancers) or it could be disappointing news (we've had to rework all our reagents as they werent behaving as expected).

Trouble is we dont know which it is and the sp has dropped on this uncertaintly.

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.

No offense taken techT. My point is really that forward selling gets banded about off pat in every raise without any real evidence.

On LDTs

"Qualified labs may create a new LDT in four basic ways (see Figure 3): • Starting from scratch, assembling relevant testing reagents and other FDA-reviewed testing components. • Combining elements of FDA-reviewed test kits with components made or separately acquired by the lab. • Obtaining the protocol for a test developed as an LDT by another facility. • Altering an FDA-cleared or -approved IVD by, for instance, enabling the product to analyze patient specimens that have been stored longer than the test’s labeling allows."

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/reports/2021/10/the-role-of-lab-developed-tests-in-the-in-vitro-diagnostics-market

Not sure that helps us know which route we are going down, but seems that its routine for not everything to originate in the lab.

With the limited stock issued (a good thing as keep dilution down) its unlikely the "new investor" will be over 3% for a TR1. But you never know.

I am sceptical regarding the forward selling. Hear that a lot, but if you have evidence of this, go to the FCA as that is of course insider trading, illegal and punishable by up to 10 years in jail. Shouldn't be hard to trace the money. Hemce why i am sceptical.

The share price rose becuase of anticipation of news, and Benkhe having been found to have set up ciz Bio Inc. and his remarks on LinkedIn.

And these do still suggest ciz intents to conduct buismess in the US soon.

But time will tell of course.

First post was cut off...

Question is, are there some other steps ciz has ommited to tell us about? That is why they need to communicate better.

Oh , on China.

Ive said before, lets focus on getting this LDT working in the US first. If it works, China will want it. Whether they will get it likely depends on politics, IP protection, partnerships and a multitude of other things. There is a large enough market elsewhere. I cant see anyone having invested purely on China, though it does lead to some of the larger estimates on share price.

Hi TechTonic,

Started writing a long reply to your post, but too long for my phone!

A few key points. I re-read Aug RNS . Ciz has never stated they have started clinical trials. The Aug RNS states that recent development "meet key milestones to begin commercial clinical trials" , not that trials had started. Specifically, the key milestone was that they could get it to run on an automated platform. It goes on to say ciz is "now engaged in clinical trials *design*" which actually indicates they haven’t started. This subtlty was discussed on the board at the time , though I'd forgotten about it.

Trials have to use same prodction reagents they will use for real, so same manufacturing, handling, transportation protocols. Allan does talk about the work needed for this in the Aug Stockbox interview.

Sounds to me like we've assumed trials had commenced without appreciating the work needed for the reagent production. I am guilty of this, as i expected trials had begun.

I don’t think we have run any formal trials at all yet. No evidence at all that we have run trials and they failed. That is complete supposition on your part, perhaps negative confirmation bias you night say?

Indeed, spending all that money on scaling up suggests to me they have used these reagents that have been developed on some internal trials and they work. Otherwise why proceed to scale up and incur that cost? Supposition on my part, but seems like common sense.

Existing investors have just stumped up £600k. Would they do that for a random punt on whether these new reagents would work?

I have questions over why we raised this way, but it actually speak of confidence that existing investors have chosen to stump up more cash. Also interested to know who the new investor is, though it may not be significant. If its BioTechne on the other hand...

Re Biotechne. Still time for them to be involed. Again, no reason to assume we've changed at platform at all.

Why would we? Its one of the best and worked sufficiently well in trials for them to RNS it. We will need partners for a point of care test. That is the really big market and Biotechne would be good here.

Proteogenix. Could simply be the best company to scale up. Again, no suggestion here that they have gone elsewhere because something else has failed.

My problem here is that ciz is not communicating very well at all. Especially the stages and timelines that need to be gone through. My jolt in confidence from the last RNS was around the trials not having started, but having re-read RNS , unless anyone can find anything to the contrary, i dont think ciz has ever said they have. But they have been unclear about the steps, sequencing of those steps and timelines!

It really wouldn't take much to get this share moving again. If we really are just requiring scale up, re-run of trials, accreditation and a charge code, then we are not too far away. Question is, is there some other steps ciz has omm

😅 well oapk20, lets hope ciz still have shares and havent sold the lot AND raised! Problem is the confidence in what they are doing has been severely dented. They haven't told us they've sold any, but then there are lots of things they don't tell us!

Before last RNS I had confidence they were doing the right things. Now I have a hope and a prayer!

Perhaps we should forget small caps and buy gold!!