Member Info for emptyend

I did suggest that the lack of option exercise may be down to inside info still being held and thus precluding exercise. My guess is that there is news coming re antibodies and the existing deal....

Conditions of the original 4.5p options are irrelevant. The 2016 conditions you quote lapsed with the original options in 2020. The options that were issued in July 2020 (the ones that were just extended) don’t have those conditions, as far as I know.

If it is all short-selling, I await the denouement with interest 😏

No idea who is selling. But they are plainly quite small (relative to a disclosable stake) and very incompetent. So maybe you? 🤔

There won’t be a TR1 RNS in my opinion, because the seller didn’t have a disclosable stake. My impression is that this hasn’t gone through the Company’s brokers, as would often be the best course for keen sellers in size.

I think that is exactly the situation. It looks like a badly handled urgent sale from someone who needs cash. Perhaps it is the Executor of a holder of 10mn shares who has died waiting….?

Not sure why being unborrowable should be a bad sign…..perhaps a painful short squeeze is looming? 😏

Traders are probably net short here by now….

Trading accounts are getting totally hosed……

….first the leveraged longs are getting hosed…..and sometime fairly soon it will be the turn of the shorts. 😏

There is probably now a price (at some level) that Vulpes and Redmile would accept if approached by a CPI patent-holder. My feeling is that some information remains under wraps and that last week’s RNS wasn’t the full disclosure I assumed it was at the time.

Good post from gf123.

One must always be wary of concluding that such market moves convey some sort of message. They don’t. It could simply have been a PI selling up to buy a house, for example. Or it could be an executor sale. Without any info such as a holdings RNS, it simply goes down as a random move for me, whatever people might think.

1% of the shares is not huge volume - I have another share in which sometimes 20% of the (much smaller) company changes hands in a day.

Very simple.

She should have exercised her options, aligning herself more closely with shareholders. If she was deemed to require further incentives, then new options could have been issued at 11/12/13p - and attracted a very much lower charge to the P&L.

These options have now been extended for six years beyond the original expiry date. Why? There is no good reason for it, given that the exercise price is well under a year’s salary.

Ps….the options extension is a Board decision, on advice from the RemCom. It isn’t the CEO’s!

I’ll tell you why it is a bad idea, Moonparty, (unless she is in possession of inside info and legally unable to exercise): it costs the company (ie you and me as its shareholders) a big charge to the P&L because a three year, deep-in-the money option has been created. That will probably result in a charge of a couple of hundred thousand pounds, simply because the options haven’t been exercised.

I would rather she had exercised - and can see no justification whatsoever for extending options unless she is legally unable to exercise before expiry.

Not really.

These options were originally due to expire in 2020. In fact they DID expire - and a few weeks later were reissued. I complained about this to Chiplin and was assured that the extension to July 2023 would be enough.

I can make no sense of why the company has extended the options again UNLESS the CEO is still unable to trade by virtue of some inside info that remains undisclosed. I don’t rule that out.

But then the question is what went on yesterday? Goodfellow, of course, wouldn’t need to disclose his dealings (though the company would need to disclose the issuance of shares upon exercise of options), so I suspect he has sold his 2.85mn - and might not have done this is the most market-friendly manner, causing some confusion?

Another announcement due soon, I think.

Just to repeat my point from 7.42 am…..

The other options question will be how the tax bill on them is to be settled. And note that the lower the share price, the lower the gain and the lower the tax bill….

…..the low price suits the option exercise. I’d presume that she has exercised and is selling enough in the market to cover the tax. Which would be standard.

And then, with all the short-term traders forced out we can get back to business as usual and some positive (and more detailed) newsflow.

The other options question will be how the tax bill on them is to be settled. And note that the lower the share price, the lower the gain and the lower the tax bill.

Re bundling things together, I’m not surprised in the slightest. One of the main functions of this RNS is, IMO, to cleanse the company of all inside info.

One antibody has potential milestone payments of $624mn, plus royalties on sales……..

So what price the whole platform, including all the five antibodies already developed…..and including the CAR-T applications that were held back from the GenMab deal for SC-129?

I’d think that could be a multiple of the current share price, given that (before the CAR-T validation announced today, but after the GenMab deal) Trinity Delta had an unrisked NPV for the whole GlyMab platform of £1.4bn). Maybe we’ll get a new Trinity Delta assessment?

Re the glymabs, my guess would be that someone is considering making a play for the whole GlyMab platform……

I’d think the option exercise will follow very soon. No need for further delay, as it would just give time for something commercial to create fresh inside info.

On the safety review re the expansion into renal and head and neck combination cohorts (not the TNBC arm, note, at least for now), note that this safety review is also the potential trigger point to start the resection cohorts in head and neck cancers. I wonder whether potential head and neck cancer patients can be given the option of whether or not to progress to surgery (which looks like a six week treatment period)?