Member Info for Greend100

He's confirmed the 7.8mn, so John Given via Castle Rock. Good news on the Tony Richardson piece.

Thanks Si. I had the details of Crow Rock holding somewhere (will dig it out later), but from memory was significantly lower than TR's holding. If it's just JG selling, it's hit the SP pretty hard (albeit in low volume, low news period).

Please can you elaborate on that Swap? You mentioned the same last week, and are therefore suggesting that CF is lying when he says TR selling down, hence useful to back it up.

I'm not sure you can draw that conclusion Earache - revenue will be recognised in the financial year that the service is delivered, so although the characterisation studies were RNS'd last year, revenues would be this FY. We don't know what else would be recognised this year - we know the SAB work will be, and that is a few mn. In the investor presentation, Leo talked through the contracts won YTD and stated all would be delivered this year, so revenue should be recognised this FY also, as should the Ampligen contract which was RNS'd after the investor presentation in June.
I don't think the above would leave them that far short of the FY21 guidance, I suspect around the £40mn mark, and then if the challenge studies are signed off, Codagenix and Govt studies could commence. I agree, I don't think they will all squeeze into this FY, but given a 2 month timescale from initiating to closing a trial, if they started late September, you'd still squeeze 1 or 2 in (difficult to say how many beds needed, so not sure if could be done concurrently).
Key part for me though is sentiment - mood music is positive, and I'll take that...

There will be news flow...a lot going on in the background and credible scientific board / CMO. They've never given any time to PIs and I don't see that changing full stop, even with a regulatory /IR head coming in.
Personal view...noisy second half of year, might be more Q4/Q1, at which point they go and seek additional funding from ii's off the back of that noise to progress pipeline, pretty much rinse/repeat of last year IMHO. How successful that is remains to be seen but science is compelling and broker reports tell a good story. Where we are at SP wise, prior to that next news cycle...who knows, a few burnt fingers out there...

If you take a peer in their field, 4D, drug dev, dual listed...150p 9ish months ago, now c. 80p. Science seems strong and pipeline progressing, director buys c 110p from memory...
Don't think TILS fall down to Accustem, others have had the same trajectory.
News due here Q3, not fun watching SP in the meantime though...

I think it's just current market conditions accounting for drop in the last 3-4 weeks (most AIM shares I monitor across sectors are 20% down in the last month) - maybe I need to look at different shares! Beyond that, just lack of news - people think they can do better elsewhere. Has been quiet for a couple of months on the RNS front, but a lot going on so expecting a busy H2 which will hopefully see us moving back in the right direction again!
TILS has always been a quick mover when news lands...

The Brendan Buckley investment more news worthy to me...granted, has a decent chunk already but more measured and in the science...

The date for that runs through into Jun 22, so assume covers characterisation and challenge studies. From memory, the first couple of characterisation studies had three participants, running for a fortnight. The ones after that had 10 in each group, again for a fortnight aimed at finding the optimal dose, which should in theory be done by now allowing challenge studies to start. Dr Chiu mentioned during presentation in World Immunisation Week (late April) all was on track but not seen any updates since.

10p on Poolbeg IPO only 3.3p from original Orph share price, given 2.98:1 share consolidation ratio though, felt about right.

I'm not overly hopeful on the Accustem share price...unless the board have been keeping a few rabbits under their hat around CE marking, peer reviews etc...
(Get all the detail around OncotypeDX etc... and wrote a lot on it a year back so get the potential but the board view needs corroborating and not seen anything as yet).
Given they'll need funding, and the debacle of getting it out there driving sentiment, it'll need to be priced in a way to generate interest from the off so assuming lower end of expectations. Hoping they've got some substantial news pre launch to garner some momentum.
My guess, 20p, so c 40mn MC. Anything above I'll take as a positive.(but secretly would like 50-60p) :-)

Just a counter-view...DoH, MHRA, Imperial, Oxford, Wellcome Trust...down tools while they wait for an announcement to tie-in with Gov timelines/agenda...Personally, I doubt it...

Posted this elsewhere at the weekend, just personal opinion on component values, doesn't take into account current sentiment though... !!

Imutex - 49% stake. Flu-v 003 completed ph2b, Flu-v 004 Challenge study complete. Biondvax prior to ph3 failure valued at c.$400mn. Value in Imutex difficult to assign due to variations in production costs, storage, clinical technology used etc...

Also Market demand/appetite unknown - trade off between perfect timing currently vs everyone trying to address this at the moment so more competition. Ph1 Universal Flu at Vanderbilt Uni minimum 2 years away but using Stalk and Antibody approach so novel. Others e.g. Oxford-based Vaccitech had poor ph2b data so discontinued the trial.

Also have AGS-V Mosquito-borne, ph1 clinical trial done.

If we take a conservative collective £250mn valuation, that gives price per Orph share of around 18p.(taking 49% stake). Pretty binary this one though...

Believe Conservbio have applied to FDA to run a phase3 with Imutex.

Moving onto PrepBio, HVIVO paid £14mn when it spun out of Janssen in 2015. At the same time, there was a phase 2a £10mn contract which arguably was linked. This was for the 62% stake, so if we assume a conservative £20mn now (difficult to tell what incremental development was done in 2016-2019).
That gives us a modest 3p per share.

Poolbeg I'm assuming was c. 3-4p a share assuming we have a c 10p launch based on what others have discussed. (taking 2.98:1 ratio).

For the Core business, bit subjective. EBITDA of £1.3mn in Q4 '20 off FY rev of £22mn. Assuming we hit c £55mn revenue this year, and EBITDA is c £7-8mn, taking a 30x multiple, gets us to a SP valued around the 30p where we are now. If we take a CRO rev multiplier of x4, gets us to the same answer. Clearly a valuation to competitors would be based on future potential, so if 20% growth was coming through, upside here. Also if we get £10mn+ Covid contracts, would think EBITDA would be higher as cost base on those Covid studies won't be proportionate to revenue upside from for example, RSV studies.

DiM we can't really get a view on but as others have mentioned, should have great potential if well executed and have to hand it to CF, he seems to get the right people around him.

He's mentioned £500k in Poolbeg, amount in Orph to be determined. Buy in price getting better by the day mind...
On the wider drop, assuming it is Tony R pushing them through Arden, couple that with no news from the company and then fear factor kicking in, and now below 200dma.
I'm assuming TR has a min price he wants (hopefully) and news from within will turn things, but who knows when...

In theory, FDA in US should advise on approval (or otherwise) of Teplizumab (Provention Bio) today - in practice could be any time in next few weeks.
The FDA's Endocrinologic and Metabolic Drugs Advisory Committee narrowly supported its approval in May (10 votes to 7), interesting to see if FDA follow suit.
As most aware, Anti-CD3 so gives momentum if it is supported. Teplizumab is humanised and IV so clinical safety data nowhere near Foralumab.
FDA approval for Diabetes and also seeking it for at-risk patients as far as I can tell, which puts more pressure on the FDA as disease-modifying rather than compassionate use (I.e.less critical).
Aside from safety concerns (which don't seem present so far with Foralumab), two key issues from submission of Teplizumab:
1) Safety data from just 44 patients -TILS take note,
2) Provention included data from different indications - TILS take note (again), conscious different applications being looked at which could impact approval speed.

Big tick if it does get approved...puts Anti-CD3 on approved drugs list and given efficacy/toxicity benefits of Foralumab, another positive step towards commercialising it.

Hi Toastal, my thoughts below , (would be good to get views of those who've worked in the ii space......)
ii's interested in guaranteed earnings, decent company size, profitable... maybe Orph seen as Covid associated so short-termism, lack of run rate business so no guaranteed base revenue each year, lack of profit (historically), low turnover/assets, CFs always said everything is for sale so ii's might be put off by lack of long term plan?

Morning!
Agree that he's controlled the narrative, but in a positive direction. Someone mentioned that CF is trying to keep the price down to buy in cheaper, and my view was that his narrative was the complete opposite - his ebullient nature and talking about what's coming round the corner is contrary to the view of him wanting to keep a lid on the share price.
Still think a sale is on the cards in the near term (just personal view). Aside from things you see with the way the business is run, I was looking through the Orph website yesterday, everything is so investor centric, doesn't talk much about the science at all. Coupled with the tone from CF himself in presentations, think it's all about building momentum to a sale (post spin offs) in the next 6-9 months. IMHO.

Personally, I don't see how he's trying to keep the price down, his narrative has been the complete opposite...talking it up...

Agree Ivy, £1mn was the figure in my head. Don't see how it would be higher given current paper stakes in Orph/Amryt/Raglan, also he mentioned £500k into Poolbeg.

Already done, thanks Rockz.