Member Info for DeBull

Docetaxel update soon apparently.

Hi Trench, it was posted on X on the 8th by #PYC.

"Daraxonrasib's ASCO success highlights a growing need for oncology modelling — a potential tailwind for Physiomics expertise in modelling and simulation. #PYC"

My thinking is, why pick this out, especially if PYC had nothing to do with it in some way? Could be one of the RNS from last year or so, where no company, target etc was named. Of all the drugs/compounds/targets listed at ASCO, they pick this? Seems more to it than meets the eye??

Trench/Ralph.

This was posted on X. and a reply was sent. Have either of you heard about this? before in relation to PYC?

https://www.asco.org/about-asco/press-center/multi-selective-ras-inhibitor-nearly-doubles-survival-pancreatic-cancer

Daraxonrasib's ASCO success highlights a growing need for oncology modelling — a potential tailwind for Physiomics expertise in modelling and simulation. #PYC

Was Daraxonrasib linked to a contract win? & was the win with Revolution Medicines? Some contract wins previously had no asset named or the company that owned said asset, let alone cost attributed due to NDA I guess.

Daraxonrasib is a asset I’ve not been made aware of.

I see that Hitesh is still on the PYC website? Others have been removed. I know Hitesh has a wealth of experience. I think either King/Ralph or Trench mentioned that he was in cahoots with Jim on a project?

If PS stays, that could be a boon for the new BOD. Several factors at play obviously, but if they can hang to him, when before he was going, makes you wonder why he was going in the 1st place?

Are you suggesting possible bad news due to the PA?

After the good news with the installation of the new BOD, and the anticipation of more positive news, i would have thought bad news would be a minimum?

Before all this started, we knew the CEO was going, and candidates were being interviewed. I wonder if with the new BOD, this process will start over again? I have read that Mike etc have pin pointed candidate(s). Peter S will stay on till end of May to help with transitioning.

3.6m i assume buy, first thing this morning at 0.50.?

I asked this BB about the possible perception about the Doseme board and the relationship they have with PYC board and the possibility of a new board interacting with them?

Only 1 poster replied i believe replied, which is fine. However, in the presentation today, JM and PS seemed to make a few comments that they and other board members have various dialogues and networks with companies either that have contracts or in the process of contracts being signed with PYC. I also believe that JM mentioned Doseme and their new management, and that they had been in contact with them. We can only wait and see if that management is still headed by Paul Edwards at Doseme, or someone new appointed by Fairlong Capital or their new acquisition at Firstline.

My worry is, that if a new board is elected here, how will Doseme management react? I was hoping to get a reply from Mike or Ian on this? Maybe respected posters like Trench, King , Ralph, Trout or Ant15 could answer with their valuable insight?

Mike & Ian etc if you are reading this, and i guess you are:

PYC have a collab going on with Doseme at the moment looking at Docetaxel. Its been going on for several years. If this collab comes to fruition, i firmly believe it will be a company game changer? The relationship was made when JM was the Ceo i believe? He obviously has a working relationship with Paul Edwards of Doseme. Although Docetaxel is still yet to be go from "development" to "validation" as per their website, which would move the Docetaxel story onwards somewhat. If a new board is inserted, how would this new board interact with the Doseme board? Would the removal of the old guard affect the ongoing relationship with Doseme or Fairlong capitol ? TIA

Https://www.linkedin.com/safety/go/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flnkd.in%2FeNRWSY_3&urlhash=_Bhz&mt=nEop824xPv9ndrKlY-pzkRHu2sQ-VFMiTLXBt8coYdCo9CVXsWGVGTOV1O91-P2yqyNRGzWZLh8JYnyWpx029DqpHRrZDSJ2yOrsFP6kaOgp8gcRVqVB0CDKYg&isSdui=true&lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagship3_feed%3BveBkOZ5hTP6yTw7%2Bo2eFUw%3D%3D

Large 7M trade appeared from yesterday priced at 0.4301

Ian has posted this today:

Been told that some comments have been made on some share chat boards that I have cut and run using the placing / wrap to dip below 3%. This is certainly not the case and all will become clear that I have stood my corner. #pyc

I am very confident that the company will flourish in the coming weeks and months.

Mike has said this:

Accumulate when the city is...

Btw, and before I am unable to speak openly regarding #PYC

You are buying broadly at the lower end of the price range, the city has sold the placement and the company looks very very interesting 🤔

Inflection point coming!

I own a lot of stock!

Thank you.

So is the GM taking place or not? The first RNS this morning said " it is intended that the General Meeting called for 7 April 2026, as announced on 10 March 2026, will be cancelled"

I hear Mike has said he is buying more, possibly in the WRAP, with the increase in the share % is Mike going to ask them for another GM?

Thank you to Trout and King for answering my question.

Here is another one.

With all those shares on the register that are being held by the companies and others that i listed, is the de facto for those held and put forward at the vote to go with PYC management wishes?

There has been for a few years now, always been pro's and con's for the board and their shareholding. I believe in the investormeet on the 10th March last year, JM answered the question https://www.investormeetcompany.com/meetings/interim-results-434 question 2 i believe. You can hear his reply.

Mike or Ian, if you are reading this, or anyone else who may know?

With you 2 holding nearly 20% of the company, and now trying to have the last placing voted down, could PYC loom to their institutional investors to back them up?

I know they have bot published these names for sometime, however in 2021 they had the below listed:

Interactive Investor Services 28.67%

Hargreaves Lansdown (Nominees) 22.08%

HSDL Nominees Limited 11.03%

Barclays Direct Investing Nominees 8.39%

Lawshare Nominees Limited 4.41%

Vidacos Nominees Limited 3.34%

HSBC Global Custody Nominee (UK) 3.10%

PYC just say this now on their website: Not in public hands: 0.77%. Please note we have recently updated our reporting of this figure which used to include private client broker holdings of over 10%. Such holdings have now been excluded as they are (currently) comprised of multiple smaller beneficial shareholdings.

Those, and possibly other II's will still exist on the register? Could PYC ask for their backing?

TIA.

Is there a resource for the X broadcast by Mike that was put out this morning?

TIA.

Trout, just caught up. Thank you for your reply. makes it a little more clearer for me to understand now

As usual Burt, you have laid out some balanced points. I have no idea what will happen here? In the RNS it says "The Company values its shareholder base and believes that it is appropriate to provide its existing retail shareholders in the United Kingdom the opportunity to participate in its fundraising." which i find disingenuous? How can a PLC "value its shareholders" with multiple placings, at a ever decreasing pps over multiple years?

According to a post on X this kind of shareholder revolt last happened over at GDR? i read that the result there cane out well? I find the whole way that market mechanics weaves its way round this very interesting.

Trench pr Trout, can you explain why Mike is so aggrieved by PYC advisors here? TIA

Interesting insight there Sharepoint.

Has this scenario that happened in another stock recently.

Thank you Trench for the cordial reply.

As you say the Data set comment was interesting. Every day i check https://doseme-rx.com/why-dosemerx/drug-packages to see if Docetaxel has made it to the validation stage.

I would have thought that if DH was going to increase his position here, he'd do it nearer the placing price?

Their comment on the "final" brick could be looked at in 2 ways? 1 way, that the final brick is there to finish the dam so it can move on to profitability and any potential placing pressure . Or, if that brick does not fitted, the dam will always leak, and eventually erode away.

Whoever takes over from PS, has got a job on their hands, and has to hit the road running.