Member Info for Chris0123

Hi All,
I recall during the fallout last week there was a post by MyLucy in which a revisit of their research and why he/she originally invested. You have only to read the RNS re HEMO CAR-T to be confident that Hemogenyx are involving the necessary expertise in "Quality Systems" run by Randall Tlachac to take this product forward. Mr Sandler is not on his own here and QS have a great pedigree. I am a holder. GLA

I agree digitt we do need something and if its an interview then so be it. If I can use the analogy of parenting where you have only just got the marauding kids (shareholders) to calm down and some annoying Uncle (could be any CEO we know) comes and upsets everyone again. As long as he knows he has lost the room and he is doing an interview for disgruntled shareholder then no harm will be done I guess. GLA

I think B1ll makes a good point regarding interview / RNS.
In my mind's eye if there was anything substantive to Report it would be in an RNS and would precede an interview. The RNS would probably have to drop before any interview was even announced to avoid scrutiny about implied RNS type announcements before they are made. The interview is, therefore, likely to just simply talk up ongoing negotiations and not contain very much or anything we have not heard already about the pipeline, which seems to have a blockage right now. I am not downplaying the interview proposal. I just do not think an RNS will follow before or shortly thereafter.
I think that undoubtedly there is an acknowledgement of the many phone calls and emails from shareholders despite some not even being replied to and this has probably prompted engagement with shareholders via an interview where you can clearly preset an agenda of questions beforehand. This interview needs to be somewhat different to others as at the moment he has clearly lost the room. I would prefer an RNS personally but if its going to be "wishy washy" probably best not to do one. Still think it is worth holding this share under review , not everything has gone sour overnight, still stuff to play for. Good luck everyone.

Peter Redmond has not even acknowledged receipt of several of my emails, notwithstanding he may not want to answer the particular queries I have. GLA

davie - if you look at Mr Sandler's Twitter account - I think the dog in the visor bought them..he's looking a bit shifty.

Stay positive Lord Paul ..there's some great stuff happening in the future I and many others believe..just frustrating at the moment. GLA

Shardster - Just read some of the BRH exchanges...see what you mean
...on Hemo we are all pussycats! Hope you survive ok.

.

Thank you too Digittt -least the SP went the other way that time.

Re The PharmaLetter article - thank you Oocanibe, much appreciated.

Re Tweets - I have noted the headline of an article written in a publication The Pharmaetter on 26th Feb 2018 entitled "Rougue Tweet Nearly Triples Hemogenyx Share Price" I was not around then and I cannot access anymore than the "headline" (to be honest I don't want to invest in buying a back-copy just to find out)- perhaps some LTH's recall this.
The point I am making is that there are grounds for the argument that "tweets" can and do have an impact on the SP. Unfortunately we are not getting the ones which are "tripling" the price at the moment. GLA

Entain and MGM Resorts have a working partnership in the US. Entain recently rejected a takeover offer by MGM on the basis that it severely undervalued their business. They still maintain a working relationship in the US, it's just business. I see no reason why Hemogenyx could not be transparent with shareholders by declaring whether they have in fact received an offer from Global Co and if they have, what was their business rationale for refusing it. Or provide a clearer strategy for going it alone.
Global Co remain unnamed as clearly they wish to be, but the positive message declaring an offer or not would steady the Hemogenyx share market and more importantly the shareholders. Look after the shareholders and they will look after the Mcap. Following this approach would put Hemogenyx in no worse a position than it is now and in my view would reduce uncertainty and lack of confidence in th BoD.significantly. GLA

Highest faller today ..ignominy! OR is that spelt "ig..no..money".
Sincerely though good luck everyone!

Hi All,
This is not a negative post, perhaps a cautious one, since there is a lot of angst in the room. It is call-out for us all to get much more savvy (including myself) in demanding a bit more clarity and transparency from Hemogenyx (where it is not commercially damaging!)
Since Global Co have been embroiled with Hemogenyx on CDX development and, at this point in time, Global Co are not financing to any great extent now in the move to preclinical trials, one one would hope the CDX Patent application filed in July 2019 gives Hemogenyx the full protection needed (whilst "pending") to independently move forward, unhindered, with this product. A CDX Patent update would not go amiss since it was filed 2 years ago. Yes, I know these can take many years but an update would be much needed by all right now.
In referring back to the original Development Agreement this states "Hemo will receive on a cost-free basis technical support, access to advanced methods of discovery, developing and engineering antibodies and "certain" intellectual property. It is imperative, therefore, that we receive very clear updates on how licensing negotiations are progressing over the next 3 months, as well as the patent protection necessary to be able of come through this process with a product not compromised by IP and patent litigation - Pharma would have a great deal more experience in the courts - a search will reveal this and much is about IP / patents. No one wants to burn loan reserves this way.
This is not a de-ramp or a ramp, I am sure most do not need these extremes today. I care about the quality of posts but more than ever now we need to direct our intellectual energy at Hemogenyx not each other. In the words of Captain Sir Tom "Tomorrow will be a good day" Maybe!
Best of luck everyone

For an RNS (the previous one not this one) to have caused such debate on this board as to it's meaning, clearly meant it was too ambiguous to be relied on.
A lesson for us all perhaps to challenge any communication and seek more clarity in an RNS sooner. We at least now know the clock is ticking for 3 months not 6.
GLA

The Global Co "severely slowed by Covid" comment raised in Digittt's update following his conversation with PHC this morning, may give some leaning toward EL as Global co and the credence of what they are saying re progress.
As of 12th April EL's solo Covid-19 antibody has been stopped because it could not match ..against emerging coronovirus variants. The "feds" had stopped using it in several states and now EL have pulled its supply of bamianivimab as a solo therapy in the US altogether. The FDA have ordered greater monitoring of the Lilly / Regeneron authorized drugs against emerging variants. I am sure that if anything is slowing progress as indicated to Digittt it will be detailed scrutiny and insistence on greater monitoring ordered by the FDA. T
Whilst I am sure Covid has slowed lots of progress, the above may slow things a whole lot more. Thank you for your update Digittt. GLA

Pingu - guess we would not need lawyers if contracts / leases / commercial deals / communications were unambiguous . we are all finding a pathway through this but hopefully we all end up where we hope to be. GLA

I think what you have said makes sense Pingu. The point which is being made though is that the exercising of the "option" is merely due confirmation that we are at stage 1 as you describe it. EL exercising the option, ONLY gives EL a period of exclusivity to agree a commercial deal with Hemo (nothing is guaranteed)- the "Option" as we all know is not the actual commercial deal - the deal could take 6 months and collapse and then as you rightly say Stage 2 where Hemo then have a right to agree commercial terms for themselves to move the product forward - which is why they tee'd up the finance, to both enable them to do that and illustrate and improve their negotiating position with EL/Global Co. Points which have been made many times. Stage 1 and stage 2 negotiations may well merge or cross over within the 6 months (if that's the stage we are in) and may well shape the outcome of Stage 2 if that is where we end up.
Stage 3 no one wants.
In summary, I believe it can be reported that an "option" has been exercised by a "Global co" and we then know what the real platform of the negotiation is (Stage 1 or Stage 2; 6 months or 3 months). If Stage 1 fails Stage 2 naturally comes into play.
The disssention here is in the opposing views about whether exercising an "option" (not a deal) can/should/needed to be reported pre a commercial deal and I see no reason why it could not. It is of material interest and the RNS have put dates (3 months) on "Option" exercising so the least that should be expected is a follow up RNS when the 3 months have expired. I appreciate there are opposing views on this. That said, it is good to have a couple of positive scenarios in the pipeline so they've got my vote as an investable business. GLA

Hi Bline, I am determined not to be a negative contributor to this forum as I am a positive about my investment but I respect you you have a right to express an opinion, as I do or even ask for additional clarity. They can only so no.
Stating that Global co (no name needs to be announced) have exercised an option tells us we are categorically in a 6 month negotiation period. Conversely, if they have not exercised an option we know Hemo have 3 months to negotiate their rights. There does not need to be any other statement so therefore no breach of corporate governance. I am sure most investors would appreciate that point being clarified. GLA

I sent this to Peter Redmond, not hopeful of a concise reply and does not change my opinion as a committed investor but hopefully I will get the point across about ambiguous RNS information for future communications. Good luck all.
Dear Peter,
I am a recent investor and I am writing to you to ask if you could give some clarity regarding the RNS alerts put out on 13th January 2021 & 1st April 2021.
These, as you know, relate to CDX Antibody Development.
As I understand it, Global Co had 3 months from 11th January 2021 to exercise an “option” to license the Company IP necessary to exploit the antibody on an exclusive worldwide basis.

Following exercise of the “option” there is then a 6 month negotiation period. However, if Global co did not exercise the “option” Hemogenyx have a 3 month period to negotiate with Global Co to exercise an “option” to license the Company IP necessary to exploit the antibody on an exclusive worldwide basis.

However, as part of a shareholder forum no one is clear what period we are in, so
…did Global Co exercise an Option and we are in a 6 month period of negotiation; or
…are we now in a 3 month negotiation period where Hemogenyx are seeking licensing rights.

The RNS process is meant to give clarity to investors and would be investors and it is very important to know whether an “option” has been taken by a major Pharma company. I appreciate this does not guarantee a deal with Global co but it does indicate there is the potential for this to happen within 6 months.
If the “option” has not been exercised then this is critical to know.

Simply stating “form of licensing” is insufficient.

Therefore, I am requesting some clarity from Hemogenyx Pharmaceuticals directly or via another RNS. Three months have passed since 11th January 2021 so I would consider that a direct “yes” or “no” answer would clear up concerns among a number on investors. I and other investors believe there is sufficient ambiguity to warrant a further RNS update to clarify matters.

Thank you for taking the time out to read this email and I look forward to a reply. I am a true believer in the work that is taking place and wish you continued success.

Hi All
Would agree that there have been some good posts Thursday - thank you for a great read. Good to see these positive and educative posts outweigh the more challenging ones.
I was researching SP volatility in so far as how Hemogenyx's have performed over the last 12 months. Weekly volatility has decreased from 28% to 11% over the last 12 month period. However, even at 11% it is still higher than 75% of UK Stocks.
It does mean the SP has become more stable and in my view this is reflective of how the pipeline of products is now viewed by investors and developing partners and how this has been managed by the company. Notwithstanding that communications can always be better. I think many posters have got a clear understanding though of what has been announced as I have. However, biotech is a risk business which creates volatility and to be honest I personally do not mind that. High risk means high reward. However, the fact that there is improved SP stability this does mean, in my view, that the high risks have abated somewhat based on the product development progress in the last 12 months and the discussions and negotiations currently taking place. Stability now means that we may see 8 or 9p before the SP uplift that this product portfolio and you as investor deserve.
What I am now saying is that those still investing have already borne the risk and should now reasonably expect the reward with a sizeable price change upwards. (Fields of Dreams - "build it and they will come" if you get my drift ) The lth's have been building a lot longer, of course, so I wish them, in particular, but ALL investors - even the grumpy ones good fortune when "they...come" .
Have a very good Friday all of you.