Member Info for Ivyspivey

FYI Calculus Capital invested in Mologic

https://bit.ly/2xbSSuB

Do not underestimate the importance of today’s news.
Worlds first Coronavirus Challenge Study and early discussions with Chinese pharma/ funds.
The crucial thing is ORPH have the expertise and facilities hence the level of interest and with more than one potential commercial partner and the need for immediate action in the race to produce the 1st Vaccine this is big.

Big news

https://www.investegate.co.uk/open-orphan-plc--orph-/rns/coronavirus-challenge-study-model/202003090700063586F/

I felt pretty stinky as missed the game with having to pick my wife up from Crufts.

Zib. Nothing wrong with some late happenings like 90+6 minutes lol

Tin hat time for energy Company's as Brent crude drops to $32.
Not going to help US Russia relations lol

About author

Sopiko Japaridze is cofounder of Georgia’s Solidarity Network, an independent union. She has been a labor and community organizer in the United States and Georgia.

Hi Looed
See article has been tweeted out by Jacobmag

https://t.co/jQObdFfxv5?amp=1

Bronxville,
I can see from Ammus comments that he is not interested in posting info or commenting on other posts just not understanding how these small bios work.
As you say the universal flu Vax is one of holy grails of pharma and obviously a Coronavirus Vax is the main priority for global pharma.
Yes they could just buy ORPH out of loose change and of course Cathal O Friel is well versed in world of big pharma and loads of good contacts.
When putting these global deals together it is all about access and awareness by the decision makers and that is a huge advantage here.
What the major players will be doing is accessing who is ahead in the race and whether they can catch up with their own efforts or is it just better to do a deal.
The deals are usually a commercial partnership with milestone payments rather than a take over as it normally suits the needs of both party’s.
I cannot emphasise enough the advantages these smaller specialised players have in the responding sooner to the need for a new Covid 19 Vax than big pharma.
But in taking the product further is where these big players have the advantage hence why a deal is often the best overall solution.

Thanks Jonathan.
But was the last post really 25/2 as that seems to be around the same date when the ii board seemed closed to non members.
I am nit too bothered about non access as long as interesting posts are copied across here which they always used to be.

GL

TC do recognise your point about not feeding “ trolls” but I am new to this board and like to find out for myself whether to trust someone or not and whether they know what they are talking about.
Having worked for both Merck and Sanofi in the past I am quite happy to engage with anyone and reach my own conclusions pretty quickly.
ATB

Ammu
It is largely irrelevant what the current revenues are.The 2 ways to measure a largely pre revenue bio like here are DCF risk adjusted or peer valuation.
Looking at the first the potential markets are huge so universal flu and Coronavirus vaccine and the risks relatively low given the progress, expertise and facilities OPRH has access to.
The big question re a Vax for Covid 19 is not whether you get to market but whether you are first into market etc.
It is the smaller Bios like here who will likely make the quickest start for various reasons and then it is the ones run by the major Vax players like Merck and Sanofi that will make the most market impact.
These large players via Pasteur Institute etc will be making their own efforts but as I said it is the small players which will likely make the quickest start so it is imperative to have these fundamentals in place and ORPH already has these so makes it very attractive for one of bigger players to advance the validation efforts as soon as possible.

Thanks Wodewick,
I know that access to ii is not easy for non members and I do appreciate those balanced thoughts

Yep CF think it is more important for GG to conclude this case as the longer the continuing argument over pro Western or pro Russian geo political backdrop will impact on the October election?
FRR are not spending any more money and the court cases look to be either sorted by agreement or pushed back into long grass so little impact there on arbitration timetable.
It does look like the ramp up in FRR effort in 2018 to increase production although not covered by the evidence submitted to arbitration would support FRR in their belief of sorting out any real issues and be a sign of confidence in their case.
I really don’t believe they would have made so much effort and a definite change in policy if they thought the risk was extremely high.
The “ failure” of UD 2 was a big blow but the prime thing was to conserve cash through this critical period and ties in with all we know.
The fight to keep control from Hope and the importance of trying to raise finance which we know has been problematic and the need to continue the development work with BH and the interest of the SMS.
I am not saying the BoD have not made mistakes and the lack of communication until recently has been a real pain.
However it does seem clear this is not a scam and SN/ZM are clearly aligned with SH as we know and they are fighting on our behalf as it directly impacts on them.
I would love to have any views from the really knowledgable posters here like Devex/ToT/ Mole/ SB and others about how they currently judge the overall situation.
I don’t mean the great sleuths who have unearthed fantastic info but more the “ strategic commentators” on how they see things in the light of the recent moves.
I am more positive about the outcome here than I have been for several months but equally recognise the risks.
I fully understand and respect the decision of some big investors here not to post their current thoughts due to various reasons but I just want to remind those that many people on here myself included really look forward to those informative and balanced views and considered opinions and do feel the situation on the ground has changed with these recent ZM interviews.
Anyway back tonSunday papers

Thanks Gipps and others.
I know this will not be as straightforward as one side is totally right and one Completely wrong which is why I was particularly keen to see if there are compromise or split judgements in the past.
It does seem as if the arbitration process is genuinely impartial and evidence based so that we can look forward imo to a considered outcome which mrBs we should at least get some return.
Personally again I would be happy to get anything back and yes many have suffered a lot of pain here but given some of the low points on here we must all have contemplated getting nothing or even just accepted that and moved on.
So anything to me is a Brucie bonus but any positive outcome given the size of the box is likely to give us all a very healthy return but let us not count any chickens as the number of foxes who have had access to the FRR henhouse has been big over the last 15 months and ot might only be a bag of bones left lol

Gipps,
Have you had a look to try and get some idea of past cases have been settled.
I know every dispute is different but precedent is a key part of law and if there are a lot of egs where the state claim of the resource has been rejected or even a some sort of split of asset would give us a lot more confidence here

The likelihood for price renegotiation and changes in the regulatory regime is high in energy and natural resource projects given the high capital investment necessary to develop reserves and unleash production. Once the exploration risks have been overcome and the associated investment costs have been sunk, governments may be tempted to act opportunistically, knowing that investors cannot move their sunk assets to alternative uses.[6] Under these circumstances, sovereigns may attempt to increase their ‘government take’ on natural resources, either through increasing taxation, royalties, fees, rights and duties by altering the pre-existing profit-sharing or revenue-sharing agreements with the private sector, or by demanding that private companies relinquish shareholdings in their companies to the state or to a state-owned oil company.[

Found a very general comment contained in above which means the Arbitrators will be well versed in FRR type of arbitration and familiar with why disputes may arise.

https://globalarbitrationreview.com/chapter/1177439/damages-in-energy-and-natural-resources-arbitrations

Morning Mills/Looed,

Link

https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/clients/summary?id=D000071040

Thanks Looed,
I know things get lost in translation but FRR claiming to have spent $580m and the GG claim several 100m less should be fairly easy to substantiate.I know that some money will have been spent in Azerbaijan etc and you can argue about direct investment and admin expenses etc but to take 99% does seem to be stretching it and the full box is surely able to be split more equitably.
Hopefully Arbitration will decide a more fairer split