Cobus Loots, CEO of Pan African Resources, on delivering sector-leading returns for shareholders. Watch the video here.
PhilGekko,
The famous SO argument is getting quite hackneyed - first, we are not in a position to know he's still selling now his stake is below 5%. But even if we knew that, it highlights the lack of fresh major investors.
The funds I listed in a post on this thread, have been invested in listed companies arguably at a comparable or even earlier stage than 4D - certainly with less diversified pipeline.
So the question as to why we aren't attracting investments from major investors even at rock bottom prices is highly relevant now - not for sometime in the future as you suggest.
An important aspect of a CEOs remit is to bring in investments. Where are they?
Also fundraisings are meant to be happening at increasing share prices. If a fundraising was to happen tomorrow it would be at 20% of the previous one at 110p. Do you call this value creation for shareholders?
Didn't say Merck are investing in every company, did I? However their investment is now largely historic.
Being an investor here doesn't mean one shouldn't be questioning things. This isn't like supporting a football team.
Richie,
If so, small caps would never grow out of their league as they would never receive investment from major players be they II or wealthy individuals - that's not the case as it is not a case of catch 22.
There are plenty of major investors, be they II or individuals, that can move quickly when they identify heavily undervalued companies, including some of very small market caps. Not all investors have the rather bureaucratic, straightjacket type of investment limits that some managed funds e.g. pension funds, tend to have.
eg Polygon Global Partners, Redmile Group, Vulpes Investment...
Some people argue that Merck is already invested. But the amount they have invested in 4D is small lottery ticket money to them: it just helps them to keep an eye on a potential winner. There are numerous innovative small to mid-sized biotech firms that they are watching for the right opportunity to come.
Why still no major investors in sight?
Auc1,
Why do you think there is such a failure by management to draw in big investors?
Lack of fresh II investments in recent years combined with updates that have tended to be poor, delayed and far-between make 4D all the more vulnerable in these market conditions. The lack of new II funds is very surprising given the progress made with Parkinson, IBS, oncology trials and antibodies - either management are not up to the job of attracting funds on the back of investments or is the progress exaggerated? It seems to be the former.
Whereas quite a few of us are rather optimistic as to the outcome of 0518 trials, it is of concern that the trend in the share price has been mostly a downward one even in the month that we expect data.
Blautix has been a fiasco so far, 18 months after the announcement of strong results - according to management. No deal with a partner pharma in sight.
NASDAQ listing was also a fiasco as it is now beyond any doubt that it was ill-timed and not followed by any major news, apart from recent news regarding Parkinson FDA approval. But, that happened 12 months later!
At the next AGM we need to question Duncan Peyton as to the efforts made to bring in investors, the timing of NASDAQ listing and the lack of progress reports. Is Duncan Peyton the right for the position of CEO? Maybe he is a good project manager, possibly a strategist as PhilGekko says but he has been looking increasingly out of his depth at most recent interviews.
How long ago was there a significant investment by an ii? Exactly the point!
The question is: why 4d hasn't attracted any worthwhile ii investments for some time? Are CEO & management not proactive at all in this respect?
The vulnerability to SO highlights the lack of ii investment in a major way: an SO type investor sells and SP collapses.
If the best answer someone, who's possibly not even an investor, can come up with, is Fidelity then the question is all the more compelling.
Sang,
You are wrong, not for the first time.
PIPEs generally involve private equity funds.
PG,
Agreed. Richard Griffiths perhaps may be building a position ?
Sangi,
"I have explained why Blautix is not currently in a P3 trial"
Er, that wasn't my point or my question. You seem to have trouble reading other people's posts, let alone understanding them.
Sangi,
"You clearly have no idea what is going on with Blautix." And neither do you, as a presumed investor 18 months after it was hailed as a success.
The price is one sixth of what it was before the announcement of the "successful" Blautix phase II results.
Let me repeat, as you don't seem to get it. I'm here for 0518, but successful data alone isn't enough. You need strong management to take the company to the next stage.
From what I've seen so far, I'm not convinced.
Sanji, actually I have over 30 years of experience in AIM and pharma...
I'm here mainly for 0518. I mentioned Blautix as an indication of the incompetence that management have shown in case of delivering value out of something that THEY hailed as a big success.
Why have they embarked on Blautix if it was not worth their while and why advertise it as a success?
History should not be repeated with 0518 if it is a success. Hopefully it will be.
4D's management's lack of reaction to constant price falls is outrageous. The seller is not the only reason for the price fall. 4D has failed to capitalise - so far - on the completion of phase II Blautix 18 months after we were told how successful it was. They also failed to capitalise on NASDAQ after we were told how essential such listing was.
Lesson learnt from Blautix: a successful phase II outcome - even in the novel area of biotherapeutics - doesn't necessarily or automatically translate in company valuation.
Almost 18 months after the announcement of Blautix phase II results, where are we? At 2 months from results (towards the end of 2020) we were told, unofficially, about on-going negotiations. At 15 months we were told we were waiting for FDA! Well, frankly that is a management issue as (probably) we could have done much better than that.
That's a lesson that has to be learnt as oncology trials are on-going. Yes of course, to say that IBS pales in comparison to oncology that's an understatement. But, as an investor I have the following concern: a lot of companies are very strong at innovation and (bio) technology. But not many grow out of the stage to become a successful mid-sized company.
The role of management is key in such transition and therefore, the jury is out on it.
The jury is out on management and Duncan Peyton in particular - he has proven himself as an investor but can he lead a team of technical brilliance into success? Has NASDAQ listing been accompanied with a change in mentality? Is management and CEO in particular still acting as if they are leading an innovative but early stage, typical AIM company or do they have the skills to make 4D a successful mid-sized pharma/biotech company?
However, the extent of shorting will be good news, the moment we get positive feedback on the trials!
Oliveira aside, isn't the question why it is shorted to such an extent and why are we brushing aside the related reasons? It is a bit risky to assume we know better than the market.
Dave McManus
On 3 November, you posted that things were going wrong with the 0518 trial. Later you told Porky that you agreed with his £10 prediction. Your inconsistency stands out a mile.
Dave McManus
On 3 November, you posted that things were going wrong with the 08 trial. Later you told Porky that you agreed with his £10 prediction. Your inconsistency stands out a mile.
No more
So Sang, you have no evidence that directors are selling?
Do you have any proof of that?
On balance the story is a promising one. Multiple shots at the goal post and all that. I’m happy with my exposure to the company as it stands.
We might learn something new soon on the day the results are announced. If not, it means that the company needs more time to carry on its work and get some results that are worth presenting from the cancer trials.
A low share price is never good news for a company. All the more for the directors that have got millions vested in the company. So you would think that they would be keen to release any information that was worth releasing.
Could they be waiting for the seller to clear and the market to become more favourable? Maybe but unlikely.
Hope that we learn something from the half year results. Otherwise, next pieces of news are more likely to be about programmes other than oncology and of course the much-awaited IBS.