Member Info for golfnut59

Setting aside today's United Therapeutics IPF trial data as the reason for the sell off, I believe the other significant factor behind the recent poor share price performance is the market’s clear aversion to the hub-and-spoke model. I hold this opinion because the sell-off began after the market learned that LYT-100 would become another spoke rather than remaining under full control within PureTech. In addition the new CEO made it very clear he would not be interested in droppping our london listing in favour of NASDAQ which was disappointing

Rockefellow, Dallo - exaclty, well spotted. The surge in UTHR market cap today based soley on data from thier IPF trial is just further evidence how ridiculous the PRTC market cap is. Wake up Mr Market ! How are we selling off? If anything this should be good news for Puretech. This should serve as big wake up call for investors.

I’ve read a few articles today about the Tyvaso TETON-2 trial. It appears that this inhaled medication targets and relieves the symptoms of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis without addressing the underlying fibrosis. As we all know, this differs from LYT-100, which is designed to slow the progression of the disease itself. While the trial’s success is excellent news for IPF patients, I don’t view it as a direct competitor to PureTech. What do you guys think?

Www.biospace.com/press-releases/united-therapeutics-corporation-announces-teton-2-pivotal-study-of-tyvaso-meets-primary-endpoint-for-the-treatment-of-idiopathic-pulmonary-fibrosis

This might be the reason for the heavy share price fall today:

United Therapeutics' stock surged by 47.66% in pre-market trading on September 2, 2025, driven by significant developments in its clinical trials.

United Therapeutics' lead asset, Tyvaso, achieved a major milestone by succeeding in a Phase 3 trial for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. This positive outcome has positioned the company at the forefront of scientific discovery and market implications, potentially influencing broader market trends.

The company's TETON-2 pivotal study of Tyvaso® also met its primary endpoint for treating idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, further solidifying its position in the market. This success underscores United Therapeutics' commitment to advancing medical treatments and its potential to impact the biotech sector significantly.

www.ainvest.com/news/united-therapeutics-soars-47-66-tyvaso-trial-success-2509/

I'm astonished at how both short positions managed to suppress the share price to exit their trades. Typically, covering a short position would drive the price up, working against the short seller. Regarding JSB's point about the 99p cash per share, I completely agree, this is a substantial figure and equals the all time low share price. While it’s not uncommon for biotech companies to trade at or below cash value, this usually reflects high cash burn rates with no near-term catalysts, signaling the market expects further fundraising or assigns little to no value to the pipeline. In PureTech's case, however, this doesn’t apply. Our cash reserves should sustain us through 2028, as we’ve transitioned into an investment vehicle requiring minimal day-to-day resources once Gallop and Celea are funded. Therefore, unless you believe Seaport, Celea, and Gallop are all worthless, trading below the 99p cash level is an absolute gift presented to us in a clearly irrational market. It implies the market views our pipeline as essentially valueless, which seems overly harsh to say the least. I remember us debating this a few months ago when the shorts were piling in after the failed Nordic bid. It didn't make sense then and it doesnt make sense now. What prompted them to close their short positions, and what were their initial expectations that led them to short the stock? Other than the CEO getting fired, I don't see what has changed between now and then. Its all very strange. I don't think ive come across a situation where a compnay is getting bid for and then the following day the shorts are piling in. Something really weird is going on here.

Dallo and JSB, you both raise excellent points that underscore how PureTechs chronically low valuation leaves it exposed as a sitting duck for opportunistic buyers. The market currently prices PRTC as a going concern at around $400 million, but any acquirer looking to break it up and sell off the assets they don't want could unlock multiples of that value with minimal risk. No matter how you slice it, PureTech remains incredibly vulnerable at its current market cap. I suspect Nordic Capital won't be the last suitor knocking, especially with PureTech's pipeline now advancing into the later stages and the biotech M&A environment heating up. If management plays its cards right we should all be well rewarded, but the risk of a lowball acquisition looms large. Sadly i suspect many of us weary investors will happily take any low ball offer in excess of £2.

The opportunity cost of holding has been brutal, costing me dearly in missed gains elsewhere, but I can’t sell now. I firmly believe at least one asset will command a multi-billion-dollar valuations on its own, within two years. With no funding concerns, it’s a waiting game for that potential to materialise. I’ll stay patient, confident that a solid return awaits in the near future. If management plays its cards right, we could be looking at a transformative windfall. Upwards and onwards!

It was refreshing to have a CEO who can actually communicate which is such an improvement over the previous inept one. I'm pleased with the new emphasis on concentrating on the three main programs: LYT-100, Gallop, and Seaport, plus Cobenfy.

Starting with Cobenfy, I was a little surprised to discover that the patent only runs until 2033. I assume BMS must be confident about extending it. Nonetheless, even though it appears PRTC can only claim royalties up until 2033, it was a welcome addition to see the board's conservative sales forecasts and what that should translate to in terms of revenues for PureTech. I'm obviously hoping those forecasts are smashed, but penciling in around $300 million in revenues for PRTC up to 2033 is good to know from a modeling perspective. I don't actually have the presentation slides in front of me, but I'd need to check if that figure was discounted or not.

Moving on to Seaport, the Glyph platform is really very exciting. I'm not sure when the Phase 2b data is due to read out, but assuming this data is as good as we all hope, there's no doubt that Seaport will be worth multiple $billions as we move into the Phase 3 trial. This is even more evident given that I remember Daphne Zohar suggesting the Phase 2b may even be registrational. Nonetheless, it's very exciting, and it's good to have a number: as per the last funding round, PureTech's stake was $256 million. Considering the market cap of PRTC is currently $400 million, that values the rest of the business at $144 million—which is ludicrous when you consider i have not yet accounted for $320M of cash, LYT100, the cobenfy revenues and Gallop oncology.

The jewel of these probably being LYT100, which has shown significantly greater efficacy than the current standard of care and greater efficacy than any of the other drugs in clinical trials for IPF all of which are using new mechanisms of action. It's hard not to envisage LYT-100 gaining a significant slice of the multi-billion-dollar IPF market if the Phase 3 trial replicates the very thorough and well-put-together Phase 2 trial. When you couple this with the promising progress of the immunotherapy drug inside Gallop Oncology, which not only is showing great promise but also has both orphan drug and fast-track designation—a Phase 2 trial seems a given here based on the data at hand.

To top it all off, we have $320 million of cash sitting on the balance sheet, enough to see us through to 2028 and ensure we can participate in the subsequent rounds of all these founded entities. The share price is a joke, unless these all turn out to be duds, patient investors will be rewarded. Upwards and onwards.

JSB, thankfully the market has reacted well to the change. Usually, a CEO stepping down is a bearish event, but not in this case. He was utterly useless, and it appears the market agrees.

Let's be honest, if Alpha were listed on the NASDAQ, its share price would likely have been in excess of £40 even without the Corpay bid. With that in mind, I’m optimistic that we could see at least £40 per share at the very least. That would translate to a market capitalization of £1.69 billion. When you account for the company’s cash reserves, the enterprise value drops below £1.5 billion which is roughly $2 billion. To me, this doesn’t seem like an unreasonable valuation for a company experiencing such rapid growth, especially one projected to generate over £100 million in net profit this year. Corpay is after all a US company that is used to paying decent multiples for high quality growth companies.

Sensible decision by Qube. It obviously became clear to them that their short was mistake so took a small hit and got out. They did well to buy back 0.8% of the company by barely moving the price. Frustrating because their short completely decimated the price on the way down. Market makers clearly helping them out

Could this contradiction, coupled with the rejected Nordic Capital bid point to a possible orchestrated effort by shorts to suppress the price, perhaps to accumulate shares cheaply or facilitate a lower buyout? If they’re banking on a negative catalyst like funding issues, they’re taking a massive risk given PureTech’s strong fundamentals and industry interest in IPF treatments.

Speculatively, the endgame could involve savvy hedge funds or potential acquirers using short pressure to exploit PRTC’s low liquidity, creating panic to scoop up shares at a discount before a major catalyst like phase 3 funding or a new takeover bid. The board’s rejection of Nordic’s offer suggests confidence in a higher valuation, likely tied to LYT-100’s blockbuster potential. If funding or a partnership with a big pharma player materialises, or a new bid emerges, the share price should surge, triggering a short squeeze. This feels like a classic biotech undervaluation story a hidden gem poised for a breakout if catalysts align. Then again I would say that, my rose tinted glasses are firmly on & my efforts to make/see the bear case are so feeble I worry I’m missing the wood for the trees.

I completely agree, Iris. The phase 2B trial data for LYT100 is unparalleled in efficacy—no other IPF trial even comes close. LYT100 slowed lung function decline to levels seen in healthy individuals without lung disease, which is remarkable. Yet, I’m struggling to reconcile this with the current share price. Even more perplexing is that shorts are piling in at these low levels, betting the price will drop further despite the high likelihood of phase 3 trial starting in q4 of n the back of potential major funding or partnerships. This LYT100 news is the biggest event of the year, so their short position is clearly positioned that somehow there is bad news to come here. If negative LYT100 news is not the reason for their short, they will be in for a rude awakening should PRTC negotiate a deal for this programme. There is zero chance the market will react negatively on news that funding is sorted for p3. To top it off, outside parties are inquiring about acquiring the entire share capital yet despite this the share price continues to drift lower. It’s all so contradictory which makes It so hard to make sense of these clear disconnects.

The safety data for LYT100 deserves proper context, as it’s significantly better than many commentators suggest. LYT100’s safety profile is at least as favorable as pirfenidone’s, despite patients receiving a much higher dose. Pirfenidone’s use is often limited by side effects, which frequently deter patients from starting or continuing treatment when the side effects outweigh the benefits. In contrast, LYT100’s exceptional efficacy—virtually halting lung function decline, a level unmatched in any IPF drug or trial—makes patients far more likely to begin and stick with treatment, as the benefits greatly outweigh the side effects. Additionally, many pirfenidone patients reduce their dose to manage side effects, sacrificing efficacy. With LYT100’s superior efficacy, clinicians can lower the dose to minimize side effects while maintaining efficacy comparable to or better than pirfenidone’s full dose. Thus, LYT100 offers a safer, more tolerable option, enabling more IPF patients to benefit from treatment than is currently possible with pirfenidone.

The Phase 2B efficacy data for LYT100 was exceptional, showing that the decline in lung function, measured by forced vital capacity in IPF patients, was nearly comparable to that of healthy individuals in the same age group. If these results are replicated in Phase 3, LYT100 is poised to become the standard of care for IPF.

Phase 2B results read out on 16th December 2024

Just to be clear I’m referring for FDA approval /clearance on the phase 3 trial getting a green light to begin.

The primary target for short sellers seems to be LYT100. I’m speculating here of course but I say this because, following the Phase 2B data release, PureTech Health’s (PRTC) stock price has plummeted. No short positions existed before this data, indicating it triggered their interest. Despite the data showing unprecedented efficacy in an IPF trial, PRTC is trading just above cash value, with short interest rising confidently. Hedge funds aren’t targeting PRTC simply for being a biotech, there are countless others to short. Something specific about PRTC, likely its key asset, LYT100, has caught their attention. I struggle to see a clear bear case for PRTC, but I suspect the shorts are betting against LYT100, possibly anticipating it will be shelved or fail to secure Phase 3 funding or FDA clearance. Positive news, such as a partnership or FDA approval for Phase 3, would likely boost the share price significantly. I’m speculating, but their short position suggests they doubt these catalysts will materialize soon, whether due to funding issues or regulatory hurdles. Shorting into such a potential event seems risky, reinforcing my belief that they expect negative news from lyt100.

The short position is even more perplexing given that it was initiated while Nordic was in talks to acquire the entire business. Shorting a company with hundreds of $millions of cash on the balance sheet and active bidders seems utterly illogical. I’m deeply suspicious because the move doesn’t align with the information available to me. This makes me believe the short sellers know something we don’t.

Hoping PRTC's cash reserves deplete before a major catalyst seems like a weak rationale for shorting. Surely, short sellers have a stronger thesis? I’m frustrated because I can’t pinpoint what it might be, and I’m clearly viewing this through rose-tinted glasses. The only explanation I can think of is that they know something we don’t.