Member Info for Brondby

Confidence has taken a battering for sure, due to the disjuncture between the last two RNSs.

Last but one RNS implied clinical trials imminent.

This one; we'll start trials at some unknown point in the future after mabs/reagents have been scaled up. With a new company that has never been mentioned before and no reference to previous mabs/reagents that previous RNSs had stated as a breakthrough. Oh, and we've raised funds at 2p with existing investors rather than at 2.1p with our agreed loan facility. No explanations.

This could all have been presented so positively. Existing investors showing confidence. Bringing on someone new (who? and why?). We've chosen not to sell CDT instead becuase we believe it will in future provide far more value to shareholders, scale up of mabs is a key necesssry stage before trials and its taken some time to find the right supplier, etc...

Now some of this may be down to PIs (myself included) not understand the sequencing of events, or the difference between lab development reagent manufacture and production scale reagent manufacture, and the need to use the production reagents in the test validation etc. But isn't that what he's meant to communicate to investors?

Part of it is also their lack of any need of PI funds (mostly institutions), part may be Allan not wanting to say or commit to anything that might change in future, and which would then mean he's got to given further details. I can understand why they don't want to give running commentary on operations. Part may be commercial sensitivity. But if it is, can't you say that?

Anyway. I still think this can succeed, but timescales now 6 months I'd say. May be too far away for some of our recent investors who hoped for a quick turnaround. But could be a painful drop in the interim until we get more explanations.

And thinking about it, if you were hoping Biotechne might buy you out, the scope for them to start supplying reagents thenselves and improve margins might provide an additional reason to buy rather than partner on the platform or rollout.

I've always thought Biotechne might be more likely to get on board as the developer of a point of care test. That is where the really big money would be made, but I would think they would want the LDT proven first. Ciz need to get the LDT out first.

It doesn't appear to be uncommon to source reagents from a differnt supplier to the platform.

Not so concerend about that. Rarely would a tech be bought before commercialisation of some kind.

Let the small cap take the risk. They would have to pay far more after, but wouldn't care if they knew it worked and they could sell it more widely.

But interesting ciz not going with Biotechne for reagents. Maybe deliberately ensuring they aren't held hostage by Biotechne if an offer did come in future?

Re-reading the RNS

"manufacturing and scale up of key antibodies and reagents"

Ok, so i get that we had reagents developed on small scale, and perhaps we need a differnet supplier to do that on full commercial scale. Maybe that is why we have gone to ProteoGenix. Or the other antibodies didn't scale well, have already been tested and were abandoned. We likely won't find out which it is.

I also get that clinical trials will need to take place using the same reagents otherwise, the verification is not valid. Different reagents could mean different results .

I did note there was no mention of LDTs or Corepath.

Was that deliberate? Are they now going for a device certicifation? Not an LDT? Or will Corepath just take the full kit and verify it. I have read that this often happens for LDTs. Stricly speaking the test should be developed inside the specific lab, but often all components are supplied and the lab verifies they meet stated specs.

"the new antibodies from this development programme should extend the range and proprietary rights that the Company has for detecting the CIZ1B Biomarker"

This bit interesting. "extend the range and proprietary rights". So could it be that scale up is not the sole reason for developing new antibodies and that they have been revised, perhaps as was suggested, to detect other cancers? Or again, perhaps more mundane and just about scaling up. Again, we may not find out any time soon.

As ever with ciz, there are hints, but rarely never concrete timeliness. But on the plus side of all this, is that they could raise in current market without the huge disounts of other recent placings (when this deal was being made the sp would have been broadly around 2p). It went up to 2.7p last week and now back down again in short order.

So mixed feelings about today.

We're perhaps several months behind where I thought we were, and ciz continue to frustrate with RNSs lacking any real insight or timelines.

But at least now scaling up reagents (how long will that take?) and clinical tests in theory should be quick. Placing done and out the way.

Also have to remember this is small cap world. Often difficult to value and changes dramatically on sentiment. Look at DEST (-59% YTD) or OBD (-66% YTD) and others. Makes CIZ (-1.5% YTD) look like a safe haven.

Hi Techtonic, I was on the verge of asking if you were ok last week, as you'd gone quiet during the rise, which wasn't like you at all. Good to have you back.

Yes, there are lots of unanswered questions here. Why a new company in France? Were the previous reagents not working or not scalable and we've had to go elsewhere? There is certainly a possibility that things have gone wrong and we've not been told. What have they been doing for the last 6 months otherwise?

Why raise at 2p when loan facility was at 2.1p? They could have made up the differnce selling CDT.

Ciz have never been particularly open with PIs. Frankly, they dont really need PIs as we've seen again today. Everything is done with institutions behind the scenes.

On the other hand, they've raised at more or less the level and dilution that was already assumed baked in. They are proceeding to scale up production. And they appear to have Benke setting up in the US and shouting about ciz. His comments on linkedin would appear a bit strange, if he was aware of any issue.

So yes, lots of questions. I doubt we'll get many answers. If you believe they will succeed, it will generate a potentially huge return. But they are certainly not going out of their way to convince PIs!

The Bear interpretation of today's RNS is disappointment over how long this is taking, or in the extreme, Widdy's "lifestyle company that never achieves anything", there will be another placing as theyve only raised 600k.

The Bull interpretation is, funding done, dilution small, ciz confident enough to be spending money on scale up, current investors confident to invest more, only a few months delay and I've had a chance to buy in at placing price, huge potential from this level.

It certainly will drop, as this isn't the RNS we were looking for and seems to indicate the test is still some months from market. But proceeding to commercial scale up is at least news, and gets the funding question out of the way.

Cizzle Biotechnology to Raise £0.62m for Scale Up of Key Antibodies and Reagents (VIDEO)

Discover More Here: tinyurl.com/23wfxr5m

Why is that theonlywayis? We thought a raise at 2.1p was "baked in", and we got a raise with someone else at 2p? Thay says to me they wanted to bring on some new investor, or existing investors didn't want to be diluted (which would be sign of confidence). (The dilution incidently is small, just 30M shares.)

Like c1p2d, I'm more interested in the reasoning for that, and what has not been said.

Settles the funding question. We knew they could raise at 2.1p, and we thought it was "baked in".

But they've raised at 2p elsewhere. Why?

Big question for me is, who are the "new investors"?

Will we get a TR1?

Well they have a pretty poor lifestyle with an underwright salary (relative to peers) and a salary freeze for two years, widdy

Well that's not the RNS we were expecting.

Why would you raise at 2p when you could raise via the loan facility at 2.1p?

I wouldn't get too hung up on the exact timing Munro19. Waking up expecting an RNS every day is a recipe for disappointment and frustration. But we all know its coming. I'm confident they are doing the right things. I'd rather they did everything right, than quickly.

There will be selling all the way up Hogbog. So many different motivations in any shareholder base.

But if the news we're expecting is in line with expectations here, IMO we're looking at anything between 10 and 20p in the short term, with still large growth potential above that, if we get news on a point of care test and expansion to other cancers.

Still looks cheap IMO, based on risk reward, but obviously people need to do their own research and be comfortable with what they invest.

Hi oapk20.

I really think any drawdown would be trivia. We're talking tiny amounts of shares in the grand scheme. Wouldn't need any pump to shoft those.

I think this is really just a response to putting evidencd together.

1- you don't set up a company if you're not expecting to be doing business in the US.

2- its been set up in February, some 5 months after stmt on proceeding to clinical trials design. That's enough time to build confidence the test will work before going to that bother

3 - Behnke's comments to the governor of Texas is as clear a statmemt as we're going to get (until an RNS) that they know they have something here

We all just have to hope that 1+1 does indeed equal 2 in this case!

For comparison, obd's Episwitch PSE prostate LDT test costs £750 in uk (about $950) so Greend100's guesstimate sounds about right to me.

I suspect the £100 figure you mention was the end goal for a point of care LFT style test.

No doubt that the real huge value comes from getting a point of care test out, but the LFT will a) start to bring in revenue, b) hugely de-risks ciz as we know the test can be commercialised.

I have a feeling, like greend100, that is more to this story than just an LFT, though don't know what that will entail right now.

I'm also intrigued by something Jace said a while back, that the politics could be important here.

Gov has just signed some trade arrangement between Texas state and uk. Ciz is about to be one of the first (the first?) companies to appear to be a success of that (the reality its got nothing to do with that deal!) and we've got a very vocal American shouting our case in the US. We're in election year; and it would not surprise me if ciz are held up as a great success story of the trade deal, which might put us all over the daily Telegraph and Sunday papers.

Thanks for you thoughts. Sounds like there is no appetite for this right now.

What are people's thoughts on the utility of a Nasdaq listing? If our principal market in the short-term is US, and we have Behnke making big noise over there, is there benefit in having a joint listing?

There's Allan trying to keep things nice and quiet and steady, and Behnke goes and makes a comment like that! The Americans are on board folks! 😅