Member Info for HotblackDesiato

Monty - it hasn't been granted yet.

https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2021204762&tab=PCTDOCUMENTS

The above link is the worldwide patent application and it notes the same UK application number & priority date of the terminated UK application.

Some speculate that the UK application should be considered as a submarine patent as it popped up and has now effectively disappeared, ready to resurface at some future time. However I'd argue the international application (that also covers the UK!) knocks that theory on the head as it is still clearly visible for all to see.

Just in case you missed it - https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/05/long-covid-research-microclots

Hi Potnak - I quite agree. The really interesting thing (though we'll never find out) is if one of the HNWs or more likely, a big pharma during an informal chat, has suggested which indication(s) to target.

A Covid treatment will be a handy tool in our trickbag but as we both know, it's a sideplay.

Afternoon all,

For those wanting to play the 'which indications will we target and what sort of value might they have?' game, the following info might be helpful.

To win the WIWWTAWSOVMTH? game (jeez, it really needs a better name than that), clearly you need to look at a number of variables rather than just picking the indication that would give us an easy win.

I'm no bio/pharma whizz but would imagine they go something like this:

1. If you were to go for the easy win, is your compound more effective and/or significantly cheaper than current treatments? No point being just another similarly effective/priced drug in an already crowded market.
2. How easy and cost-effective is it to manufacture & store the drug? Why be the best treatment on the planet if the cost per treatment cycle is astronomical - I'm sure you've all read about some individual requiring a treatment but the drug is £100k per dose.
3. Is the target disease only contracted by a few dozen people a year? Yes, they need treatment but a company is generally out to make profit so we need good revenue streams before turning our efforts to sorting out your furry elbow syndrome.

You get the idea.

I hope a few of you find the contents of this file useful - https://pharmaintelligence.informa.com/~/media/informa-shop-window/pharma/2020/files/reports/top-10-best-selling-drugs-of-2019.pdf

Page 25 in that file gives the Top Diseases Targeted by the Best-Selling Drugs of 2019. I see the name Keytruda gets repeated quite often - ring and bells?

For more really interesting data, go here https://pharmaintelligence.informa.com/resources/key-topics/drug-pricing

Whilst this is all just a bit of idle speculation for the contributors here, the BoD will already know where we're heading and they'll want to win more than some garden furniture and a fondue set.

Our final destination - https://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpeg/PIA24439.jpg

Hi Elcap - I've recommended this one before, not a book on the markets but a real eye-opener re the pharma industry, Bad Pharma by Ben Goldacre.

Hi Seawolf/Siennaj - the question here is what sort of investor is the company looking to attract next?

With an MCAP of £34bn, it might be that Lloyds are happy with the number of shares in circulation as it allows huge numbers of small investors to get in on the action. If the first time investor is going to take a chance on the markets, it might as well be with who they already bank with. Also, I seem to recall when the Tesla sp was over $1200 they carried out a stock split to divide the existing shares of its stock into multiple new shares to boost the stock's liquidity and attract more investors to the Tesla brand. With so many average punters wanting a slice of the Tesla pie it seemed a reasonable move to put the sp slightly more within reach.

The above is fine if you want to attract mainly small-time investors however to get investment of, say, £10m or more in a single transaction then we might need to make ourself more appealing to those who haven't been following the SAR story for as long as people on this board have.

With no current income as such, we therefore have to appear as a serious player by advertising our unique selling points i.e. our global patents, pipeline of compounds, successes in the lab and an sp that would be perceived as 'credible' to someone just scanning their eye down a list of companies and their share prices - £1.50 passes this 'glance test' better than 5p, irrespective of what the company actually does.

All we really care about is if our holding is likely to reach our target minimum value within a certain timescale. If SAR gets there with 3bn or 100m shares should be of no consequence if that timescale remains the same.

I reported this back at the time - llamas role in treating covid https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58628689

They even made an appearance in the last Royal Institution Christmas Lecture https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0012tzh/royal-institution-christmas-lectures-2021-3-fighting-back

For anyone wondering how the cost of drug development can run into billions, this might be of use: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_drug_development

So how has Sareum been able to come so far with relatively little funding? To quote from the SAR website, "we focus on developing therapies against targets where existing preclinical and early clinical data is available. This data can give a strong indication that a therapy will disrupt a targeted biochemical process and improve patient outcome without significant side-effects. Sareum’s approach is lower risk than developing therapies against entirely novel targets."

It's therefore no wonder that the BoD are beginning to carry out the preparatory groundwork required to attract even greater funding than that raised from HNWI friends. This is hardy news to the regulars here but remember that it was always part of SAR's gameplan - they've always stated their intent is to take development only so far.

So whilst a number of contributors are against consolidation due to bitter experiences elsewhere, if you have faith in the ultimate value of the science and a determination to hold your shares until your exit price is reached, then stop worrying and remind yourself it's all about the IPR and MCAP.

Here endeth the pep talk.

My initial posts yesterday may have led to a bit of friction between some posters. This was never my intention. One person's concern is another's winge. That's part of the problem with any text based debate, you lose the nuances of reading facial expressions and body language.

We're all here for one or two reasons - make money and cure horrible diseases. We will succeed so let's not fall out in the process.

Best regards to all, even to those furry tourists who show up from time to time.

Hotblack.

None of us are so niave as to think PH should operate in a wholly altruistic manner but it makes you wonder what assurances they gave our BoD regarding how they will conduct themselves.

PH: Hey, we can introduce you to institutions looking to drop tens of millions in one hit!
SAR: Hmmm, interesting. And will there be any collateral damage in the process?
PH: No, don't worry, we'll be fine.
SAR: I was meaning about us.
PH: Ooooooh, no one's ever asked that before.

This link was posted on another share's chat (if you've been following today's posts here then no prizes for guessing which).

I don't know who the Youtuber is but he's got a strong opinion on PH's modus operandi.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWJn48d5Cq0

Kovno - the 12mth decline I was referring to was my other holding, not SAR and a number of posters here have speculated that our sp has declined due to the actions of PH. Hope that clarifies.

Warthog - the BMN sp had rallied at the end of last year and was about 1.5 times yesterday's sp. The rather abrupt RNS didn't give any reason for the ending of PH's involvement which has led to all sorts of unsubstantiated speculation such as being complicit in shorting the stock.

Anyway, sorry for derailing the SAR chat but I thought it might be pertinent here.

Regards all.

Yeah, the real key here is the 'in the US' clause. Hopefully our BoD have learned a valuable lesson and any future licensing deals will be watertight in our favour.

Just an observation re our chums at PH. After a constant decline in sp over the last 12mths my one other holding has today RNS'd they have ditched PH as corporate broker and the sp is up almost 10% on the news.

Makes you wonder.

I hope I'm wrong but I'm beginning to wonder if we've been a bit stiffed on the Sierra deal.

With regard to milestone payments - from the agreement RNS, '...upon the dosing of the first patient in the first Phase 1 trial of SRA737 in the United States, and a payment....upon the dosing of the first patient of a randomised Phase 2 trial of SRA737.'

The RNS didn't clarify if the patient in the P2 trial must be also be in the US to trigger the milestone payment - anyone able to clarify?

The trials noted in Zylo's links are in UK and Spain - if Sierra continues to trial 737 outside the US then it could be a long time until we see any financial benefit to the deal.

Anyone got any thoughts?

Hi GlenF - from the figures you provided there are maybe two or three contributing factors in what could decide the eventual proposed ratio.

The first is simple - vanity. What looks better, an sp of 52p or £2?

Secondly, if we need further investment later in 2022 then we may well be requiring greater funds than our HNWs are willing to venture. This calls for institutions and the question there is how much of the SAR pie are we willing to give away for however much we need. There's still a great deal of risk. Is there a 'sweet spot' with regard to the number of shares in free float and so on?

Thirdly, and following on from Thoth's musings, a ratio of 30:1 would currently give an sp equivalent of just over $2. This is one of the minimum criteria for a Nasdaq listing.

Hmmmm, a great deal of head scratching between now and whenever an EGM gets called.

Hi Thoth - a Nasdaq listing might be tricky based on current sp. A quick scan of this https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/assets/initialguide.pdf suggests a minimum bid price of $2 is required. Hmmm, now how do we get our sp to reach that figure?!

PH and Hybridan will have their own list of consolidation-related priorities and if I told you that the interests of private investors appeared at number 6 on the list, you might be impressed. Though to give some perspective, number 5 is 'get new filters for the coffee machine'.

However! Let's not forget that Tim & John have around 100m shares between them and they sure as hell have no intention of seeing the value of their hard work get eroded by some slick city boys. Tim & John will have had lengthy discussions between themselves as to what a consolidation would mean for their shares in the long run. And don't forget, they're paying Strand Hanson to give them independant financial & strategic advice too.

As and when an EGM is called, the BoD will have to make a strong case for a consolidation otherwise they risk it being voted down - this assumes shareholders care enough to vote on such matters!

A number of posters here have outlined how they lost out with other consolidations but did those other companies have what Sareum has?

Morning Spurs - Consolidation isn't a done deal. Shareholders might vote against it. Even if there is a consolidation, no one knows what will happen afterwards e.g. will the sp go up for a week or two then dive or will there be great news right after consolidation that takes the sp to new highs?

Will the results of the tox study be known before or after any proposed consolidation? Only the BoD know and they ain't talkin'.

The only known that you currently have is the opening sp on Wednesday will be about 5.25p - is that a good price for you or not? No one can answer that except yourself.

Consolidation doesn't bother me one way or the other as if big pharma wants to pay us £1bn for one of our goodies then why care how many shares are in issue? With IPR, surely it's about MCAP?

Regards.