The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
And of course with KBC being a Belgian firm they'll know a few HNWs over there who may be also interested in the world of pharma. But I couldn't possibly comment (cough, cough).
PH could help themselves by asking James Steel to hang around for questions after any meetings he's attended. Though I've not been to one, I gather he vanishes as soon as the meeting is over.
True, Potnak, we have no evidence that they had anything to do with bringing in RF or the consolidation however, try as I might, I can't find any shareholder on any forum singing the praises of PH. They do seem to have a bit of a reputation (whether earned or not). I've not come across the same level of disdain for, say, Hybridan.
In the absence of news, sentiment is what moves the sp and you can't deny PH are felt to be public enemy number one. At least now that RF are effectively out of the picture.
It may simply be a case of in the eyes of the shareholder, a broker can't win. They must always be the villain as a BoD would never shoot themselves in the foot. However our BoD are often chastised for not listening to shareholders so if enough have contacted the BoD to say get rid of PH then even if the collective anger is misplaced, what can the BoD do to appease the masses?
With the general anti-PH sentiment here I wonder if the BoD are gently trying to distance themselves from them. Using Hybridan for the raise might be the first step and once the BoD are in a position to announce P1a results, they could tie it in with a change of broker and watch the sp fly.
T&J aren't stupid so I'd hope they are able to put two and two together if all our financial woes really do stem from advice given by PH. Only the BoD will know the whole truth of the matter and I suspect T&J are as keen for the sp to turn around as the rest of us.
Just to add, it looks like a broker has a 2-day exemption from issuing a TR1 if they still hold enough shares to warrant declaring it. So I'd suggest the 9.5m shares have been sold on or at least 6m or so have been otherwise we'd see a TR1 from Hybridan.
See DTR 5.1.4.R2 - https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/DTR/5/1.html
"A market maker relying upon the exemption for shares or financial instruments within DTR 5.3.1R(1) held by it in that capacity must notify the FCA, at the latest within the time limit provided for by DTR 5.8.3 R, that it conducts or intends to conduct market making activities on a particular issuer (and shall equally make such a notification if it ceases such activity)."
Morning SOG - I did wonder that too as to who has those 9m shares. If any individual or company holds them they'd have to issue a TR1 so I can only assume they've been sold on to entities holding less than 3% of the company. Unless as the broker, Hydridan are exempt from that rule and can drip-feed them as required. I'd presume they stumped up the £955k and paid SAR meaning Hydridan could then profit from the sale into the market - perks of being a broker, I suppose.
At least PH didn't benefit as far as we know.
Hi Krone/SOG - interesting stuff (well, maybe only to some of us). I've looked at the data in Table 18 available in the supplementary section of the report and 737 appears to have been researched by AstraZeneca in combo with either Gemcitabine, 5-Fluorouracil, AZD1775 or SN-38 for the following list of cancers -
B-Lymphoblastic Leukemia
Melanoma
B-Cell Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma
Non-Cancerous
Pancreatic Carcinoma
Head and Neck Carcinoma
Neuroblastoma
Breast Carcinoma
Burkitt's Lymphoma
Glioblastoma
Small Cell Lung Carcinoma
Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma
Esophageal Adenocarcinoma
Mesothelioma
Oral Cavity Carcinoma
Osteosarcoma
Gastric Carcinoma
Ovarian Carcinoma
Lung Adenocarcinoma
Ewing's Sarcoma
Colorectal Carcinoma
Kidney Carcinoma
Thyroid Gland Carcinoma
T-Lymphoblastic Leukemia
Chondrosarcoma
Plasma Cell Myeloma
T-Cell Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma
Cervical Carcinoma
Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Bladder Carcinoma
Other Solid Carcinomas
Endometrial Carcinoma
Acute Myeloid Leukemia
Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma
Squamous Cell Lung Carcinoma
Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia
Other Blood Carcinomas
Rhabdomyosarcoma
Prostate Carcinoma
Low Grade Glioma
Hodgkin's Lymphoma
Biliary Tract Carcinoma
AstraZeneca wouldn't be putting so much effort into research with 737 if they didn't think it had potential.
Regards.
Preyno - You seem to have interpreted my post incorrectly to imply the BoD would give away insider information for another's financial gain (the FCA might have an opinion if that happened) and also assumed that individual would repeat such info on a public forum.
Direct access could simply be used to put across widespread concerns such as, are PH really the right people for the job? Such access would ensure shareholders didn't have to rely on either the BoD seeing their comment here or playing e-mail roulette with the investor relations contact.
It could also explain why the 1802 translational studies are taking so long (ignoring the funding issues).
Thanks Aber for the considered response. The closest we may come to having an individual on hand to keep the BoD honest is if any of our HNW chums are able to pick up the phone and contact Tim directly. Surely injecting such large amounts into SAR's coffers buys you some perks such as direct access to the BoD even if they can't tell you anything market sensitive.
Regards.
My thoughts too, Potnak. Far to difficult to appoint someone, even one of the HNWs would probably shy away from the required scrutiny from us lot.
If Parker gets a hard time on here from LTHs, imagine what an (un)elected punter would get.
Hi Aber - so what would be the vetting process for this nominated shareholder? How would we trust them with insider knowledge etc.? It's fine if they have a sufficient number of shares (is it 5% or 10% you need to get a seat on the board?) but otherwise what criteria would they need to have - a business degree? Otherwise they may be more of a hindrance than a help.
Hi Basil - it'd be interesting to know how many drugs developed by large pharma are able to skip P1b, not too many I suspect. I hope news of our intent is spreading through the pharma grapevine and we attract a major as a partner. That would put us firmly on the radar when it comes to 1802.
Morning Bobbler - I had looked at Boehringer Ingelheim before but wrote them off as they're wholly privately owned so I presumed there would be no shares available to offer i.e. with a revenue of $9bn and no shares in circulation as such, how do we value circa 136000 shares in the company?
That all said, I'm puzzled by the following link - https://annualreport.boehringer-ingelheim.com/2023/letter/shareholder/index.html
If anyone can read or access it, good luck.
Regards.
Morning Celtic - that's just how business works sometimes. We just have to wait and see.
Hi Lsesar - having completed P2 trials in combo, the BoD may have presumed 737 was at a point in its development that would attract larger upfront payments upon further licensing. Seems perfectly reasonable to me based on what I've read regarding deals for potentially P3-ready compounds. So who here expected a near carbon-copy of the Sierra deal?
Celtic - it's near enough 4mths since the license was announced and there isn't even a hint of who has it in any corner of the internet. For all we know it's been renamed and is currently undergoing preclinical research in combination with other drugs prior to trials in humans.
I keep looking on the US clinical trials website for any newly registered trials mentioning chk1 or anything that could be linked to 737 - nothing to report so far.
We can't even say for sure if our own BoD know who has it. You'd have thought the US firm would announce the deal in a 'look at us! see what we're doing now!' kind of way. I can only hope bigger games are being played behind the scenes and we'll all be pleasantly surprised when we know what's really going on.
Although Potnak suggests it might be with a small company looking to do a bit of work on it before selling it on (which is plausible), I'd be surprised if the CPF picked a small company over a larger pharma to progress 737 (assuming large pharma were interested).
In a nutshell, I'm stumped.
Conz/Dorset - at the time the BoD maybe knew a 737 license was in the closing stages and they probably thought there'd be an upfront payment large enough to cover our needs so RF was just a 'short-term payday loan' that turned out to be ill-advised and/or poorly chosen. Suddenly it went from we only need a a few quid to tide us over until the end of the month to oh crikey, we're now tied to a chair in a deserted warehouse and our kneecaps are soon to be history.
Luckily, enough shareholders heard the screaming and burst in to save the day.
Hi Celtic - any intellectual property Sierra was able to develop whilst 737 was licensed to them should be handed over to the CRT Pioneer Fund as they are the owners of 737 (we are only financial beneficiaries if there's a commercial license). This doesn't stop anyone from patenting a novel use of the compound e.g. the Celtic007 Pharmaceuticals & Dangerous Toy Company Ltd doesn't own the rights to 737 but you could patent a use which if approved means someone would have to pay you a fee if their use infringes your patent.
If you look at another patent (see below) and click on the 'show all events' filter in the right-hand column, you'll see an entry dated 5/2/24 that says the patent is assigned to CRT Pioneer Fund.
https://patents.google.com/patent/US20210077499A1/en?oq=US20210077499A1
It's possible all IP has been handed over by Sierra but the admin side is yet to filter through to all the patents. I still think our mystery licensee is Sierra (again) as they have so much work in the compound & patents.
Looks like Sierra are keeping a tight grip on patents covering 737. The link below shows a Japanese application was published on 30/1/24 so they're obviously happy to keep paying for the patent process though not sure if it's now effectively assigned to CPF.
https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/result.jsf?_vid=P22-LVMG62-27469