Member Info for HotblackDesiato

Hi Steady, I guess the chairman's statement covers all bases. However I can also see a big pharma saying 'if we're expected to pay top dollar then we get exclusive rights to 1801 (or whatever), not just for one or two indications'.

The good thing is we clearly have communication channels already open with potential partners. That's half the battle right there.

The thing to remember in business is that if you can't tell the other party to go to hell over the proposal then it's a bad deal.

Fearg's got me thinking (rarely a good sign) and I wonder if PH have been brought on at this point in the game to ensure they are fully versed on what we have in the pipeline. My thinking being - since our compounds could be beneficial in multiple indications, would PH be the experts required to construct multiple licensing deals for the same compound but to different pharmas & targets?

For example license 1801 to GSK for condition X and license it to Merck for condition Y etc.?

Kerrrr-ching!

Hi Fearg - I wouldn't expect a Monday RNS clarifying why we're now employing PH as that would be a bit of a waste of money as the details could've been added to the released RNS. Plus, of course, we have the Investor Meet on Tuesday so I'm sure we'll get more on SAR's expectations for the relationship.

Hope you've not been washed away by all the rain!

Hi Stoney - I agree and I'm certain PH will be able to open a few big doors for us but let's not forget, we're paying them for the pleasure therefore the least I'd expect is a Tweet on the day of the RNS to say 'Peel Hunt is delighted to be appointed etc. etc. etc.'

Either way, it's a clear step in the right direction and we'll hopefully get the full lowdown on Tuesday.

Regards,

Hotblack.

Our announcement couldn't have been a surprise for PH so I'm slightly disappointed that there's nothing on the PH news page about us, not even a Tweet (they managed to add the Focusrite deal to their news page the same day it was announced). Could somebody wake their web monkey?

Hi Ahfam - hmmm, I hope I've not been hoodwinked by any replies that turn out to be less than truthful :-(

Stach, thanks for the detailed reply. I recently posted part of a New Scientist article re drug trials which noted, 'Between 2015 and 2016, the median cost of a clinical trial was $19 million' so it's clear we're going to have to attract collaboration with large pharma rather than individuals with deep pockets.

I'm not fully read-up on the disappointing deal with the Chinese - was it the only deal available to us at the time? Anyway, all now ancient history I suppose as it didn't amount to much but no doubt lessons were learned for the future at SAR HQ.

Regards.

Stach - thanks for the reply. I was thinking along the lines of it's the nature of the beast within the world of pharma discovery for a company to issue billions of shares and therefore it should not be an immediate red flag to prospective Institutional Investors. Surely it's a case of what has the company done with the funds raised and what do they have to show for it?

I'd like to think SAR are ahead of the crowd in many respects.

Hi Stach,

When you say, 'In cases of AIM a huge number of shares usually indicates protracted,troubled past' is that a generalisation or do you think it applies equally to the pharma research sector too?

Here you go - https://www.investormeetcompany.com/

Morning Mafuta,

I'll submit the following question on your behalf - Regarding Peel Hunt, could you outline the reasoning behind this appointment and also the timing of it?

I'll really get exited when they announce the appointment of a yacht broker.

Good times ahead.

Hi Salford, of course we should give Tim & Co the leeway they rightly deserve and we shouldn't expect detailed answers to certain market-sensitive questions, but it's only by asking such questions and listening to the answers that we shareholders can reaffirm our faith in the BoD. If any of the questions I've posted get the 'we can't answer that at present' response then I'm quite ok with that. I trust the board entirely but I've invested a whack of cash so would like to know how bright the future may be.

Hope you & Mrs. Salford are doing well,

Hotblack.

sorry, typo - you're.

Hi Alan, no need to be so defensive - I'd never stop you or anyone else from doing as you wish, however if you've told an MP that Sareum has vaccines then your are misleading them.

Hello all,

I've submitted the questions below for next Tuesday. I'm only expecting a complete reply to the one re Sierra. As for the others, do we have any poker players among us who can read tells?

1. Could the crystalization techniques covered by the recent 'Crystalline Forms of a TYK2 Inhibitor' patent application be applied to our other compounds such as FLT3?

2. There are 3 other individuals named as co-applicants on the 'Crystalline Forms of a TYK2 Inhibitor' patent application as part of 'an agreement'. If the patent is granted, is it wholly owned by Sareum or will the co-authors or their employer be entitled to a percentage of any future related revenue?

3. How confident are you that Sierra Oncology will progress SRA737 within the next 12mths?

4. Was Sareum approached by the HNW investors or did you approach them?

5. If the government's AGILE platform is used to progress any of Sareum's compounds, do you foresee any potential drawbacks to this approach e.g. losing full control of the trial or losing full ownership of the compound after the trial is complete?

Whilst I understand the sentiment, you should know we don't work on vaccines.

I certainly don't wish to appear mean but perhaps it's better to leave communication with the govt. to our BoD (if they feel the urge).

Kind regards,

Hotblack.

Hi Alan, can you outline what you said in your letter?

Regards.

The Investor Meet site notes, 'You can pre-submit questions directly to the company up until the day before the meeting, in addition to asking questions during the live presentation. Whilst the Company may not be in a position to answer every question it receives, it will address the most prominent within the confines of information already disclosed to the market.'

This suggests they might have to give fairly vanilla answers to the most probing questions but nevertheless I'll be submitting the ones I mentioned the other day (though edited for brevity).

I've not taken part in one of these meetings before but I'll be using a different name (and not my real one either!) just in case they also give the name of the questioner - we don't want to give any wombles our personal info, do we?

Aaaaaannd Thoth4 is history.

Just had a look over on 'the other place' and it's womble city.

I didn't see the post in question here but if dark forces, sorry, that gives them too much credibility, uhhhh, eejits, are having to resort to targeting respected individuals in such a way then it's fair to say this share is heading north, bigtime.

I do get the feeling the eejits behind all of this are the type of people who call everyone 'mate', has their date of birth tattoo'd on their neck, declares that they are going to 'smash it', wants to be called 'big dog' by colleagues and fantasizes about getting through SAS selection. You know the type.

The science will prevail.