Member Info for Hulver

Happy to add my shareholding towards getting improved corporate governance and investor communication.

This is like an investment in a venture capital fund; only venture capital funds report progress and financials quarterly and also invite all shareholders to an annual investor update meeting. Existing shareholders shouldn't be finding out significant developments through video leaks months after the same has been disclosed to others, then there are other meetings and financing opportunities that investors are not invited too. The evidence to date suggests that the ineffective contribution from the current non-exec directors has let the scientists and the shareholders down. By alienating the shareholder base - who knows what opportunities HEMO has missed out on - the board certainly don't.

Further endorsement of this growing area.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/cincinnati-childrens-to-expand-clinical-trials-with-launch-of-applied-gene-and-cell-therapy-center-302158119.html

and there is a link through a former employee of CCH who is now at Hemo.

Mr I, unfortunately no idea. We are just pawns on the chess board, maybe we will reach the other side, maybe we won't, but you have to be on the board to have any chance.

We need Kasparov to figure out what's been happening here.

Meanwhile, methinks, someone(s) are happy to hoover up as many shares as they can at the lowest they can get away with.

Share Status: Not for sale.

As we are talking probability, I am not sure that those two outcomes are mutually exclusive - could be both?

Safety stats from trials show that 3rd-gen CAR-T has lower no CRS (but in any case there are ways of dealing with that now though obviously a lower reaction is better).

HEMO-CAR-T is 3rd-gen - suggesting increased probability of showing safety at P1.

There are three outcomes from each Patient: Not safe, Safe, Safe + Efficacy

Success is presumably safe in all three, with efficacy signs in at least one.

Direction of travel folks (well, of CAR-T science and treatment at least) shown in this recent article

https://www.uhhospitals.org/blog/articles/2024/06/rapid-rise-to-cancer-free-outcome

...and could this be the centre VMS was referring to given the KvB connection.

Expanding, or possibly a replacement for Jessica Jang who had previously been several years at Cellectis but is now at Fore having left Hemogenyx in Feb 2024 after 11 months.

https://www.theladders.com/job-listing/synthetic-biology-scientist-or-senior-scientist-hemogenyx-pharmaceuticals-llc-city-of-da-ak-ny-_v2_-7-3850515343.html

Some questions for the AGM if anyone is going to be there and willing to ask, if they are not covered by others attending:

1. How are they managing staff wise, given that Sir Marc reported at last year's AGM that it was difficult to recruit and retain scientists at that time and that Hemo's salaries were below market rate.

2. Please ask them to expand upon the plans for Bait Biotechnology which seems to have been shared with new investors last year. Is there still a plan to spin off Bait Biotechnology and, if so, what will that look like for existing shareholders.

3. What does the board see as its 3 greatest risks to achieving the company's objectives and how are they managing them?

4. Now that the facility is proven for CAR-T manufacturing, do they have plans (as indicated when they first acquired the facility) to insource work for other institutions, given the biotech facility shortage, and thus also create a revenue stream to help cover costs.

5. Going forward who is the person shareholders should address questions to and in what format as emails to Peter Redmond get neither acknowledgement nor response.

It seems strange that in last year's report they informed that they intend for the AGM to be a principal forum for communication with shareholders but then remove the online attendance functionality this year.

Thank you.

Very confident positive interview. Multiple expectations for future clinical trials. HEMO and its fountain could be a game changer.

Sounds to me like news on testing of 'CBR for SARS-COVID' is not far away, and with that some news on funding/support arrangements for that part of it.

There appears to be no facility to attend the AGM remotely this year.

Hence this week's update presumably.

But why? Any thoughts?

Is anyone going? If so is there a risk that it will just be teh business of the meeting?

A decent RNS and share price down - seasoned HEMO investors now.

'All is well in the world.' - as someone posted last night - and so it is.

'The setup of clinical sites ... is underway.'

Strangely I was looking at UCSF last night, wondering if it may possibly be involved. Didn't get very far with my research as more than a few labs there.

Contrary to Mr I's view, when I read today's RNS I found there to be some very interesting new information in this RNS.

Very pleased to here the expansion and progression of the product candidates - all these things should encourage funding.

It also gives the information ahead of the AGM, rather than relying on people to ask the right questions.

That in mind, it's time to be preparing your questions for the AGM opportunity.

Genius - one thing you've surely learned by now - there's simply nothing simple about Vlad.

Coincidence? Vlad at conference last week - same time, there was a little bit of buying interest.

That buying interest seems to have dropped away again - that's all in my view.

So was this a whale (433,333,333m shares) that they know would be sold all the way from post announcement of IND announcement 6p+ down to 1.5p?

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/HEMO/loan-notes-sale-conversion-facility-terminated-hv15qc61v94asy5.html

Were some in the know, and did they short?

Does this also help explain the shocking placing price of 2p?

Are we done now (until the next episode)?

From recollection of that meeting Vlad attended, where BARDA reps were part of a panel - they look to do matched funding, where their grant supplements equivalent funding raised by a company from other parties.

Yes, page 2 the £90m is after 20% discount: that seems a large discount given that the funds, lead investigator and intent are all in place.

Page 4 - expected news flow short term - the opening of the clinical trial site, injecting of first patient; and then subsequent updates. Also potential for an update from CBR in vivo testing (that has been ongoing in government related facility for some time).

Thank you for posting, I am not able to see it there as I find my access to Linkedin viewing is restricted, as I do not have a Linkedin account.

Mr I - was that £90m fair value before or after the 20% (?) discount for not having yet actually started the trial in the first patient?

Please would someone post this broker note as it is still not showing on the company's website.

In one of the Proactive Investors videos, in March, Vlad indicated expecting to inject first patient at UPenn in the 'next few months' - well we are almost 3 months since then, so should not be far away.

I should add - 'subject to funding'.

Yes, they did report that when the lease was taken out, and that Manhattanville was the right place to be.

We are already in the expansion phase, the last few years has seen expansion of the team of scientists (both research and and key operational), new lab facility, state of art equipment, and even an expansion to the pipeline with CBR.

This is what is happening - and what seems to be the bigger picture for the future.