Member Info for Jiving

Indeed it does make you wonder if we would be presenting there were we still suffering from the ho ho 'leadership' of Blackwell/Brindley & Riddell. I note there was a 2021 ERS Congress, which it seems we missed, surprised Brindley & Riddell didn't jump at the opportunity to hand out their CVs outside like flyers.

And what are AZ/Merck's competitors intentions in this space? There are so many unknowns on both the supply side (how many companies globally are working on Lynparza enhancements) and demand side (how many pharma's want to enter the space & when). With the 28 March patent RNS & the more recent NXP004 update our interest in the space is now clearly public.

Already undertaking Phase 1 clinical testing :https://www.biopharma-reporter.com/Article/2021/04/13/AACR-AstraZeneca-unveils-early-data-for-next-generation-PARP-inhibitor

Mars, I hope NXP004 is a big improvement on Lynparza and attracts interest from pharmas. But we have no idea how many competing drugs there are out there intending to replace Lynparza. The value of an improved version once the Lynparza patents expire is obvious to many people internally in AZ & Merck & externally among research biotech companies like NFX.

We are due an update on 001 following the individual updates on 002 & 004. In itself not expecting much, but a payment would be useful.

Very good, thanks. I always wondered why they did an RTO when they had a done deal for NXP001 (i theory, in practice subject to payee bankruptcy). Answer the delay meant they couldn't keep essentially self funding, so they tried VC capital & were eventually forced into the RTO, but even that didn't arrive in time hence the convertible loan deal before that. Reality was/is they were at a 'very' early stage in the 002 process & I suspect VC not interested as too early, and of course were right - here we are 4/5 years later still going through 'final' tests.

V interesting Soup never heard that before. Roughly when did this happen - pre RTO/IPO?

I think that the Kissei deal was actually fairly well progressed some 2 years ago, so it was not pure hyperbole to say it could arrive 'soon'.

I don't see how any substantive talks on 004 could really begin until more test results come in & our patent position is secure. Also we need to appreciate we don't know what the competitive position is regarding Lynparza substitutes AZ, Merck & others have in the pipeline. Presumably they have been trying to create value added follow-up drugs that can be patented prior to the Lynparza patent expiry.

Was half expecting a NXP001 update today.

Why are there virtually no listed companies without a Chairman & at least one executive director (if you can find them please give details)? Because they are essential leadership positions in any company and to not have them says to the world you are not a serious company. New investors - who we desperately need - are not going to touch a company that is such a shambles it cant even organise a new Chairman & appoint an executive director.

To finance the testing programme for 002 & 004 we need way higher revenue from the Lanstead scheme - a higher share price is actually priority number 1, and we get there by by being as 'investor friendly' as possible. We are literally leaderless, after each previous resignation we got a replacement same day or at least a plan. The next crucial step was an interview where the new Chairman/ executive tried to calm investor nerves & set out the future that they would 'lead' us to. Now in week 5 - nothing, because we literally dont have anyone in the key 'leadership' positions.

I dont think we have to end the company but I do think we end the nonsense that a listed company can muddle along without a Chairman & 1 executive director. What new investor is going to invest in a company without these essential positions filled - as they have been for NFX every single time one has become vacant. The 002 & 004 updates were sensible & positive but could do nothing to get the share price back to where we were a month ago, let alone higher.

And for a while top of the LSE Share Risers - been some time since we did that.

And he also got rid of Allenby, who actually produced a useful & informative research product - considerably better than the usual pap that comes out of smaller company brokers.

Agreed.

It just goes to show what a positive mindset can achieve with the same material, AR's 30 May RNS was very negative & failed to highlight the positive, now we have the reverse - there is hope (rational hope that is).

But can they get the share price moving without a Chairman?

Have a hunch we will get an NXP001 update shortly - Friday?

Nevertheless its still his job to be IR at ZIOC, it cant be too onerous to answer a few questions a week. I found him quite approachable until around March, when he did not reply to a simple technical question I asked about the Jumelles contract - ie nothing contentious like asking current state of Glencore talks.

99. The KP2 MOU was signed with Summit in April 2021 - some 10 months before Russia's invasion of the Ukraine sent potash rocketing. The company has stuck with the potential deal since then, the contrast I would make is with the December 2019 Jumelles framework agreement with COIDIC which went nowhere.

Thanks for the info guys, it fills in some gaps. And the formulation work is clearly still v important for fine tuning 002 & 004 as test results come in. Alex got dealt a tough hand with his NFX employment timing, if we get JV results from 002/004 hopefully that will help him (& us) out.

KP2 look to be inching towards a deal. They are in the position I always dreamt ZIOC would be in. I am primarily now in KP2, I prefer their slow progress towards a less lofty potential end point, than no progress.

Its less management, we need a company leader to represent the company internally & externally. Thats why we have always had one as either Chairman or CEO - no matter how small we were. As do essentially all other companies regardless of size, its a point of focus particular for third parties.

Does Alex monitor the CRO tests?

Soup agreed we dont urgently need two figureheads, but we need 'a company leader' and realistically every company has at least 1. For the last 2 (post Dan) years we have had a single leader for probably more than half the time - a single executive chairman, or CEO (no Chairman). Its a more esoteric corporate governance issue about dividing Chairman & CEO, which is not the issue here.