Member Info for Kev7722

She's right though - back when the SP was £8.50 there was an expectation that phase III would be successful and lead directly on to approval to take Traumakine to market.

We now know that the target market in Europe is a third of the size, that there is only a very limited Asian market, and that we don't have enough cash to see Traumakine through the additional trials required get Traumakine approved. There is still of course a (albeit perhaps much smaller now) risk that the additional trials will identify further problems... that is after all the point of conducting them.

All of the above will play into any JV arrangement, and be reflected in shareholder value. For the time being I am targeting £3.50 as being a good outcome following partner news and positive trial outcomes... I still believe this to represent an excellent return on my investment, but a return that is based on the company as it is now, not where is was following phase II.

I'm also not pricing Clevegen in to my target price - for me there's still too many unknowns there... obviously the best case scenario is again multiples at some point down the line, but as we all know there are a lot of potential outcomes in these situations other than the best case scenario...

Hi Beggar, I’ve read the interims RNS and think I’ve seen the interview comments re. cash so I’m aware that there was plenty in the bank, and that the short term strategy to conserve cash was essentially focussed on not throwing any more at Traumakine until they knew where they stood with it.

Given that they now think that they’ve identified the issues and are keen to progress with brining Traumakine to market I personally think it’s appropriate to circle back to the cash conservation question and ask if the original cash preservation plan is still in place, or if they are back to spending money on it. Personally I suspect the latter, but that may mean they need to shorten the timeframe for the next steps.

Not really sure why this is seen as deramping personally - I’d rather they spent all the money in 3 months and most went on trying to bring this to market than spending it over 3 years keeping the lights on :/

Thank you, I thought I'd heard that cash burn was down to c. 500k a month - I was basing the <€1m on the stated €11.2m and 12 months cash remaining.

But yes, costs on the horizon now that won't have been factored into that initial 12 month window, so I'd expect them to need cash one way or another by the end of Q1.

Personally I thought 92p was a reasonable price point to get to (obviously), so yes I'm hilariously underwater here right now - but that doesn't change the fundamentals. Although maybe if I had 700k shares on the table I'd be jumping up and down screaming all day too.

Cash balance as at June 30th 2018 was €11.2m, at which point they stated that the company had implemented a 'Cash preservation program' to reduce burn rate (presumably to just under €1m a month, although that's not stated... I think the figure was given in interviews?).

The preservation program was based on, 'Halting the commercial, manufacturing and regulatory activities underway for Traumakine'... my point being that presumably they will presumably now want to revisit some of these activities in order to progress Traumakine, so the 12 month figure is somewhat misleading

What we do all know though is that every day we wake up and check the markets, and every day FARN is not at the top of the risers list with a 2'600%+ gain...

Reality starting to set in here for most - a new trial seems like the only option to take this forward, and at what cost (time & financial)?

I still think a partnership agreement that gives us a high single-digit percentage of the total revenue is a likely outcome at this stage, if it means the drug being fully funded through to market. That's still a potential €20m of revenue per year for the European market, and scalable if the drug is effective amongst Caucasians and Africans.

Some posters would have you believe that the market is going to wake up any day now and decide this that the company is actually worth 20 times its current value... my advice would be to try and look at the facts objectively

I'm still confident that there will be opportunities to but at c. 1.5p before further news if your strategy is to average down, but either way I expect that you'll be fine at current prices

A few months ago people were touting higher oil prices as being a major factor in getting the BG and local population on board with offshore drilling... presumably therefore the current issues with getting non-opec members on board with cutting supply is likely to have the opposite effect? It sounds like anything less than a 1m barrel a day cut and oil will drop below the $50/barrel mark again

The percentage very much depends on how much of the risk the partner is taking on re. likelihood to ultimately taking the drug to market I'd imagine, and how much time & money is going to be involved in terms of getting there, then marketing it once it is there.

Have been trying to get a feel for the size of the potential market here - treatment is effective in 1/3rd of cases for Caucasians, with around 170'000 ARDS cases in Europe per year.

Estimated cost of a treatment, say €4'000 (I've seen estimates ranging from around €3.5k - €4.5k, but I don't have much personal knowledge in this area, so I don't really know if €4k is reasonable). That would give a ballpark €225m of revenue per year... how much of that is Faron likely to hold on to? If they partner up and take a royalty arrangement then maybe 8% as a conservative estimate?

Don't get me wrong - that's still a potential revenue stream of close to €20m a year against a current mcap of around €30m, and doesn't price in other markets or Clevergen.

Any of my numbers feel way off? Just trying to get a realistic feel for where a 'good' outcome actually takes us as a company

Not wanting to sound harsh but I feel less sympathetic - anyone who had done even a cursory amount of due diligence would have realised that this was being oversold and avoided buying into the spike. They were also fortunate enough to have an opportunity to mitigate the short-term losses a day later, and long term (post news on CA) they'll probably be fine anyway.

Beggar - sorry I meant it sounds like another company were developing a drug to treat ARDS, I wasn't talking about Clevegen, was trying to research the competition.

For the benefit of all serious investors - what is the other drug? How does it stack up against Traumakine in terms of stage of development, trial results etc.?

Manifesto obviously has a point - there is a huge difference between having only available solution that works in certain cases, and having two available solutions, one of which only works in certain cases...

“The D28 overall mortality of this group was 11.1% despite receiving, or not receiving, concurrent steroids. In patients with the C/T polymorphism who received Traumakine but not concurrent steroid treatment, mortality was only 4.2% (n=25).”

If that rate of 4.2% holds up in future trials with steroid use taken out of the equation - I’m not going to lie, I’m excited... today’s going to be a good day!

Zen, that’s not even very effective ramping - you’ll only buy people in if there’s an element of realism, £25 is so far detached from reality it’s pointless even saying it.

I think Dan’s target of £1.50 is much closer to the mark personally... we’ve seen the SP move upwards quite fast in anticipation of good news a couple of times recently, so a repeat of that after Christmas followed by a decent YODA might see £2, but that’s probably wishful thinking on my part.

As an aside, I do think there’s the potential that a decent YODA may cause a spike, before the reality sets in that it’s essentially laying the foundations for a new trial. Potentially something to keep an eye out for if anyone’s planning to trade the share rather than simply holding for the end result?

Personally I liked this bit:

'Are you going to go back?'
'We already have'

I'll say one thing - I find Markku very reassuring... he exudes all the confidence of someone who has complete faith in his product he's selling, which is something that I think most people would find very hard to fake if they had as many chips on the table as he has

I tend to think of them a bit like fixed rate mortgages, or fixed energy tariffs... the fact that the Dec '21 buy/sell price is higher than the current spot price is less a reflection of where nickel prices are expected to move between now & then and more a reflection of it being a de-risked opportunity to buy at a given price further down the line (in other words you'd usually expect to pay a premium for locking in the price)

FYI - futures are forward contracts... in other words it's an agreement to buy or sell nickel at a predetermined price at a specified time in the future (in this case in 3 months / in Dec '19 / 20 / 21)

In other words I'm anticipating YODA news in Q1, and any early results in Q4 will be a bonus for me

Having read that paragraph of the RNS again I'd say that full results are more likely to be delayed slightly if they are now looking to get conclusive proof that corticosteroids interfere with Traumakine performance... as I mentioned earlier that wasn't the primary objective of YODA