Member Info for LSBM

I'd push back slightly on the doom framing of those 3 outcomes, because I think it misses what's actually happening here.

Yes, the cash position is tight — but look at what they've built in the last 6 months:

MSA signed with Gastro Health today

Two CRO contracts signed (Oct/Nov 2025) with leading global networks

Johnson & Johnson contract extended in February — a company doesn't extend a contract with a burning platform

Monthly burn already cut to $300k — down significantly, showing real cost discipline

This isn't a company that can't sell. This is a company that is closing deals and the pipeline is clearly building. The issue isn't whether the commercial model works, it's purely timing.

On the 3 outcomes:

1. Dilution via raise — if anything, a raise at this stage of commercial traction could actually be the best outcome. You're raising with real contracts, a signed MSA, and a J&J relationship. That's a very different story to raising on hope alone.

2. Administration — this feels like the least likely outcome given directors are actively discussing bridge loans. These are people who wouldn't be putting their own money in if they thought it was over.

3. CLN conversions — frustrating, yes, but it keeps the company alive through to the point where revenue starts flowing. If the Gastro Health relationship and the CRO partnerships convert to paying contracts, the dilution becomes a footnote.

The real point here is that Trellus appear to be at an inflection point — not a death spiral. The commercial momentum is real and accelerating. The tragedy would be running out of road 6 months before the revenues arrive. The directors clearly know that too, which is why they're bridging it themselves.

Sometimes the darkest moment before the dawn looks exactly like this. Only time will tell.

🟢 COMMERCIAL: GASTRO HEALTH MSA

This is a big deal strategically. Gastro Health is the 2nd/3rd largest GI physician network in the US — 400+ specialists, 150 locations, already running active pharma-partnered clinical research. Estimated IBD-eligible patient pool within the network: 90k–250k patients. That's the exact cohort Trellus was built for.

Add this to the existing partner stack:

✅ J&J – Elevate live & extended

✅ ICON/Takeda – TrialSet in active trial

✅ PSI/Sanofi – Two late-stage trials from mid-Q2

✅ Gastro Health – MSA for TrialSet + Elevate co-marketing

Tier 1 partners for a micro-cap. The commercial thesis is taking real shape.

🔴 FUNDING: EYES OPEN

Cash runs to early April. Director loan discussions underway. Burn has been cut from ~$440k → ~$300k/month which shows discipline, but this is survival-level language. Dilution from loan note conversions is ongoing and real.

⏱ REVENUE TIMELINE

2025 revenues were ~$545k. Realistically: Elevate co-marketing via GH practices Q3–Q4 2026; TrialSet via GH-facilitated trials 6–12 months out. The MSA is a framework — not a stated contract value. Potential is significant; conversion takes time.

💡 The Gastro Health deal is the strongest commercial news TRLS has put out. The next critical RNS is the funding bridge — if directors put their own money in, that's a meaningful signal of confidence.

Someone has bought 7m shares this morning. I wonder if this is a one-off or the start of some movement upwards.

More like it! Like the contents too. Whilst it's nothing new to us, it definitely reads as a more compelling pitch and exactly what we need to get licensors interested. It puts the compounds in focus relative to the market, which is also important for investors alike.

Indeed, drop is overdone. PoG down 7% THX down almost 14%.

This drop is PI shifting investment slightly to rebalance other investments, given the mass sell-off. Great opportunity at these prices, given that Interactive Investor's fair value is 15.85. This gap will be snapped up. DYOR

Agree, THX is materially further ahead now than when the share price was around 81p at current PoG. Now with the PFS published and the de-risking really starting to show through with strong economics, clear development optionality and a growing West Africa platform make this look like an easy investment case. Yesterday’s shake-down has only made it look cheaper to me. Worth noting the PFS uses a long-term gold price assumption of US$3,500/oz, with upside sensitivity to US$4,250/oz. The SP drop is all fear and not based on economics.

In case you haven't seen this:

https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/1089025/immupharma-ceo-on-p140-progress-and-expanded-pipeline-with-kapiglucagon-1089025.html

J&J’s FDA approval of Icotyde is a major validation for once-daily oral psoriasis drugs and the TYK2/JAK1 space. Sareum’s SDC-1801 looks increasingly interesting in that context: positive Phase 1 safety/PK, dose-responsive PD readouts, and a thesis that it could deliver brepocitinib-like efficacy ( better than Icotyde) without the same dose-limiting toxicity. With the 16-week GLP tox study restarting and Phase 2-enabling work underway, a clean tox outcome could support a much stronger regulatory and partnering case. The class has now been de-risked commercially, which should add value for any licensor or future partner.

This is great news! Do we think €6 million plus interest and additional compensation will keep QBT going until they pen a deal? I know it's a bit piecemeal recovering these funds. The investment case is looking up.

On trolls, I have lots of names added to the green bin and therefore only see a handful of messages on boards.

Scrodingerscat; on point A – it’s true that Kapiglucagon wasn’t being pushed forward in any public sense until Lanstead came into the picture, but isn’t that essentially what a partnership is for? A third party comes in, sees value, wants to de‑risk and accelerate something that might otherwise sit in the background. And if the company ends up with more assets to offer, doesn’t that ultimately strengthen IMM’s licensing prospects overall, giving them more leverage and more options in future deals?

On B – I take the point that Lanstead isn’t putting in upfront cash, but structuring the deal around share placements is not unusual in biotech, especially when you’re talking about a licensor‑licensee with a long‑term development path. The idea that this “isn’t a real investment” because there’s no lock‑in feels a bit harsh, when the real constraint is regulatory / project‑related (IND, 505(b)(2) etc.), not how long Lanstead decides to hold the shares. If they were forced to hold for two years, that still doesn’t change the fundamental risk profile of the asset or the trial data.

On C – agreed, Tim is employed by IMM, and that’s fine; the conflict risk is visible, but that’s why we have boards, disclosures and related‑party oversight. If people are really worried, the question is whether the board and NEDs are comfortable with the structure, not whether Tim is “on their side” or “on Lanstead’s side”.

Nolupus; on the numbers – even if you take the 2–2.5m annual burn “to keep the lights on”, extending the runway from Q4 2026 to Q4 2028 doesn’t mean the Lanstead proceeds are just a fancy burn‑cover. The 6m “expected” from them is tied to committed funding for the Kapiglucagon programme, so conceptually that’s meant to be ring‑fenced for the 505(b)(2) work, not wrapped into general overhead. If ~4–5m of total spend over the next couple of years is “keeping the lights on”, then the rest is, by design, the new pipeline push – it’s not that the money is being “stolen” for ops, it’s that the company is using partner‑linked capital to run both.

So while it’s fair to question the structure, the timing, and the dilution, does it really add up to say this is “not an investment” or “just a cash grab”, when the capital is explicitly tied to a de‑risking pathway and a long‑term diabetes franchise play? Or is it more accurate to say this is simply an AIM‑listed small cap raising funds for its pipeline assets in quite a conventional way, and the concerns are more about how the deal is being communicated than anything sinister going on beneath the surface?

Isn’t it worth remembering that one of the first lines in the last couple of RNS announcements is that the “P140 Update – remains on track for licensing deal in 2026”? If that’s the official line, is it really fair to act as though the whole thing has fallen apart or that Tim dropped the ball somewhere?

Isn’t it more likely that Tim just wanted to get the deal moving as quickly as possible, but once you’ve got multiple pharma parties under CDA, the whole process inevitably stretches out? That’s pretty much how biotech partnerships work – more diligence, more internal committees, more time to line people up, not some “failure” the way some people are framing it.

And on the funding side, isn’t it fair to say that this raise isn’t really about “keeping the lights on”, but about funding a fast‑tracked product they’re pushing through the 505(b)(2) pathway in Type 1 diabetes? They’ve guided at least H2 2028 on runway now, so this looks more like a deliberate move to add value to the pipeline than a dilution for dilution’s sake or some kind of back‑handers story.

At this stage, when the company is juggling a complex P140 deal and a second asset in T1D, is it really surprising that timelines have stretched and the cash call has been framed around acceleration rather than survival?

Also helping to lift Raspberry Pi were comments from Nvidia chief executive Jensen Huang, who said on Monday at the company's GCT conference in San Jose that "every company in the world today needs to have an OpenClaw strategy".

Raspberry Pi shares closed up 19.7% at 347.00p.

A spokesperson for the company said: "We're not aware of any undisclosed developments driving the share price move. We note ongoing interest in AI-agent platforms such as OpenClaw, including Jensen Huang's comments yesterday.

"We remain excited about the possibilities offered by the long-term trend towards AI on low-cost hardware at the edge, of which OpenClaw is one example."

Results not until 31st. Is news incoming sooner or are these results expected to be magnificent?

Exciting update from ImmuPharma (IMM): They’re smartly leveraging the FDA’s 505(b)(2) pathway—a proven fast-track for NDAs by building on approved drug data, slashing costs and timelines vs full trials. This is exactly how AIM biotechs like IMM finance R&D: advance a portfolio of licensable assets (P140 for lupus/CIDP shines here) to attract partners or buyers.

Perfect setup for value unlock—strong IP + regulatory momentum makes IMM takeover bait for big pharma eyeing efficient pipelines. Bullish!

This filing further de-risked for institutions and firms up analyst targets c.100-120p+. Should be a good day as economics in the filing are conservative.

Another RNS: Sareum Acquires Licence for SRA737

MTL predominantly uses grid electricity for its Runruno operations in the Philippines, supplemented by diesel as backup rather than as the primary power source.

Runruno draws stable, continuous power (averaging ~10MW) directly from the Philippines National Grid via a dedicated 69kV transmission line from the Bayambang switchyard, connected through an on-site switchyard and transformers (40MW initially, upgraded to 75MW capacity).
A long-term contract with SN Aboitiz Power (hydro-generated) ensures reliable supply as a direct contestable customer of the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market (WESM), minimising losses versus local utility limits.
Diesel generators serve only as backup for outages (e.g., restored mains power in Nov 2025 after a disruption), not for routine processing needs like the BIOX/CIL plant.

The Nicaragua project (24% complete toward Q4 2026 first pour) will likely follow a similar grid-primary model once built, given regional infrastructure and MTL’s track record of securing national grid tie-ins to control costs—diesel would be prohibitive at scale.
This electricity-heavy profile benefits MTL from stable Philippine power costs (~lower opex volatility) but exposes it to grid reliability risks, as seen in recent outages.

QBT looks to be entering a pivotal phase — the company has confirmed that its Bitcoin mining rig has now been sent for external testing. What’s especially noteworthy is the calibre of the parties apparently involved — these are serious names that would not waste resources on testing unless they had already seen convincing preliminary data.

It’s worth remembering that QBT’s R&D team have spent years refining and validating their methods before reaching this stage. Their focus on replicability and scientific rigour suggests they would not get to this point unless their internal results were consistently repeatable.

The fact that independent testing is now underway also implies a high degree of confidence from both QBT and those evaluating the rig. If these results hold up externally as they did internally, the potential implications for the company — and the broader mining sector — could be very significant.

A big moment for QBT and its shareholders. Definitely one to watch closely in the coming weeks.

This is the pivot from lab demos to OEM-grade validation on “one of the most advanced rigs on the market”. MicroBT/Bitmain feel strongest—literal market leaders who’ve shipped under NDA before. A win here = instant credibility.

If They Nail Commercialisation…

Software-only Method C (runs on control board, not ASIC embed) already hit 10%+ lab uplift. On live OEM silicon? Here’s the prize:

• For QBT: SaaS licensing or rev-share on millions of TH/s. 10% edge on a 10,000-rig fleet = £10m+ annual recurring at scale (rough math, conservative take).

• For the OEM: Efficiency crown. They bundle QBT AI, miners pay premium—win-win lock-in.

• Market: Forces copycats. Pools embed it. Next ASIC tape-out? Method C baked in.

• Upside: 1st mover on AI-guided nonce hunting (meta-header scan vs. bit-hunting) could redefine SHA-256 efficiency post-halving.