Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
Spacman
Interested to know why you think it is preferable to push for a sale of the company for circa 200million as opposed to waiting for the outcome of a funding transaction running in parallel, as you suggest.
Ignoring for the moment, secured before the auditors sign off tag?
Professional
My opinion, I think your assumptions are wrong on both counts.
“To be clear : them offering to buy the conpany for the cheap ( say 20p) would still be a good possibility and i think majority will accept. 100% certain i would. Cheers”
Further to my last post I will add, the original filing dates become Priority Dates in respect of IP rights going forward.
Having extensively studied the previous Synairgen patent applications I have noted nothing regarding ‘Viral Persistence’
So don’t be surprised if an application pops up in the future. Will keep you posted if it does.
Manifesto,
Synairgen to date have never made their intentions known publicly when fIling a new patent application.
For the obvious reasons, a new filing application is not in the public domain (published) for approximately 18months.
This enables the applicant to finely hone the application within reason, along with filling additional supportive applications. Similar to the published Covid application which encompassed 3 eventual published applications that were formed into one application going forward for examination and consideration for Grant.
In the world of maintaining IP confidentiality from competitors this is a normal and wise course of action.
TommyD_19 does make a valid point regarding “viral persistence “ and the possibilities for SNG001.
Spacman,
Our views on the immediate way forward differ, My preference is to give the BoD this last opportunity to achieve their stated H1 plans and goals, starting the Phase2 trials. These limited trials once started should not take an inordinate time to complete.
If they are successful, it will facilitate the ability for the BoD to maximise the opportunities to negotiate from a relative position of strength, be it, J/V or other options that may arise from interested BP’s/parties.
Should they fail to start the trials in H1 and another delay ensues, they will have to answer for their failure at the next AGM or even beforehand and bear the consequences. Until such time I’m of mind to give them this last chance for their current H1 plans.
Manifesto,
“ I think our stocks may be too close to the end of their shelf life for our last chance trial”
That will depend if the stock is in ‘phial form’ ready for administration, 3year shell life (if I recall shelf under review as it could be longer).
Or
Powder form awaiting ‘fill finish’, 5yrs upto 8yrs deep freeze storage) again I recall storage under review.
I’m with you TommyD_19
There are PI’s who hold opposing views and are willing to let Synairgen continue as planned (H1). The time to reconsider other options is if timelines are not met.
Then perhaps those from both sides of the divide can attend and make their feelings and suggestions known at the next AGM.
Doc.Daneeka
I believe the advantage of the Casanova assay as opposed to others available is the comparative speed of results return, enabling speedier test-treatment for the upcoming trials.
Not sure what your point is, and feel we may end up going round in decreasing circles.
However, I have confidence in both the Casanova assay test and the ability of Synairgen to use it among other tests to enable the conclusive outcomes for the forthcoming planned Phase2 trials.
Not disrespectful to Synairgen Doc.Daneeka, I just can’t envisaged the Casanova assay test being tweaked for Synairgen’s needs/requirements given the years of development in perfecting the assay test and end product.
Doc.Daneeka,
That’s a bit of a stretch to suggest:
“Synairgen are certainly fortunate if Casanovalabs is designing / adapting the assay for the P2s. World leaders in their field and undoubtedly the best partnership you could imagine”
I believe it’s more a case of two science driven researchers coming together at an opportune time in their research cycle rather than designing/adapting the Casanova assay for the P2’s.
In light of the expected use of the Casanova assay test in our upcoming Phase2 trials, and the assay being a new development.
I’ve been looking at the requirements for Diagnostic Trials, assuming Synairgen will be first out the blocks to utilise this new test, it would appear that the stakeholders of the Casanova assay test have as much to gain from a successful SNG001 Phase2 trial as ourselves.
It leads me to believe that the Casanova stakeholders have been careful when choosing the right candidate (SNG001) to showcase their diagnostic test. Hence a perfect marriage for both Synairgen and Casanova stakeholders:
“Although establishing an accurate diagnosis or excluding disease is a critical first step to manage a health problem, medical decision-makers generally rely on a larger evidence base of empirical data that includes how tests impact patient health outcomes, such as morbidity, mortality, functional status, and quality of life. Therefore, the diagnostic trial type II evaluates the value of test results to guide or determine treatment decisions within a broader management strategy. Typically, differences in diagnostic accuracy result in differences in delivery of treatment, and ultimately affect disease prognosis and patient outcomes. As such, in the diagnostic trial type II, the downstream consequences of tests followed by treatment decisions are evaluated together in a joint construct. These diagnostic randomized clinical trials or test-treatment trials are considered the gold standard of proof for the clinical effectiveness or clinical utility of diagnostic tests.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3600406/
From the past, we know there has been mutual admiration for each other’s work in the autoantibodies and INF field.
TommyD_19
I can confirm during pressing questioning at the Q&A session (AGM), whilst they confirmed they would be using the Casanova assay test, they would not divulge the manufacturer, only to say the test is not commercially available yet.
My reaction was, a useful marriage, Synairgen need the test, unknown manufacturer obtains in field use.