Member Info for LSBM

Indeed, wow! What level of re-rate are people expecting pre- and post-PFS? I'm thinking now that the date is set and 1.78 Moz has been expected with buy-in pre PFS, an 80p maybe on the horizon. Post PFS, we are looking at 90-£1 at the very least, depending on the delivery plan and capex, but given POG, this could be sooner than expected.

I agree with much of what has been said; however, it seems we have lost sight of the key announcement today about the US consultancy, which signals a structured BD push for SDC-1801 and 737. Fellow holders – the AGM statement flags Sareum engaging a specialist US consultancy to prepare and advance partnering discussions for the SDC-1801/TYK2 portfolio. This isn’t fluff; it’s formalising a competitive BD process in Big Pharma’s backyard (target lists, data rooms, deal modelling). It would be great if they could tell us more about the structure and timelines the consultancy has given.

Indeed, a 70% uplift in volume compared to the 10-day average. Could this be an indication of some positivity to come? Perhaps early data from the BBB project with Receptor AI? Normally, AGMs don't elicit an uptick as they are administrative in nature.

Try enabling Ublock origins in extensions and add ons. This works on firefox not sure about other browsers.

Some interesting evidence so far on the unique P140 when compared to what is available:

P140 (Lupuzor™/rigerimod) exhibits moderately strong Phase IIb evidence as a first-in-class “immunormalizer” for lupus and up to 50 autoimmune indications, outperforming GSK’s Benlysta (belimumab) in rapid onset for arthritis/rash (67.6% SLEDAI responders at week 12 vs. 50-68% SRI-4 over 52 weeks) via selective autophagy modulation without broad immunosuppression risks of AstraZeneca’s Saphnelo (anifrolumab) or Sanofi’s frexalimab.

Evidence Strength and Comparisons

Phase IIb trials (n=92) showed 84.2% SLEDAI (Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index) response at week 24 (vs. 45.8% placebo), superior tolerability (mild injection reactions; 8.2% discontinuation) over GSK’s Benlysta infections (25-58%) and Sanofi’s frexalimab CD40L blockade side effects. Unlike GSK’s Benlysta (BLyS inhibition, slower flares reduction), AstraZeneca’s Saphnelo (IFN blocker), or Sanofi’s DR-0201 (bispecific B-cell depletion), P140 clears autoreactive T/B cells via CMA with peptide safety and 2025 patent for Type M disorders.

Expected Deal Terms

Ex-US rights could fetch $200-500M+ upfront/milestones + double-digit royalties (vs. Avion’s US $70M/17%), boosted by broad IP (20-year exclusivity, diagnostics), differentiating from crowded biologics in $100B+ market, with 2026 close anticipated.

DYOR- Sources

https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/randomized-double-blind-placebo-controlled-studies-of-p140-peptide-in-mannitol-lupuzor-and-trehalose-forigerimod-in-patients-with-sle/

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3812851/

https://trial.medpath.com/news/e4cb465a007a2edc/immupharma-files-groundbreaking-patent-for-p140-immunormalizer-targeting-type-m-immune-disorder

https://acrjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/art.40470

https://pharmatimes.com/news/immupharma_avion_ink_lupuzor_deal_1318379/

We have Dupax in between, which is likely to be significant. A maiden resource of even 500,000-1 million ounces (conservative given historical mining and anomalies) at similar grades would add years to Runruno’s life post-2028, boosting NPV through low-cost production amid high gold prices. Polymetallic credits (Cu-Zn) enhance economics, and the program could expand if initial hits materialise, positioning Dupax as a high-impact derisking catalyst versus core assets like La India.

Apologies copied paste error:

Thor Explorations (THX) reported solid Q3 2025 results that largely met or slightly exceeded analyst expectations, driven by strong operational performance, elevated gold prices, and disciplined cost management.

Summary of Q3 2025 Results vs. Analyst Expectations

• Gold Sold: 19,650 ounces at an average realised gold price of $3,535/oz (significantly higher than prior-year $2,328/oz and above typical analyst assumptions near $2,000–$2,500/oz), generating revenue of $69.9 million.

• Net Profit: $43.1 million, up notably from $17.5 million in Q3 2024, surpassing consensus estimates.

• EBITDA: $51.8 million, almost doubling Q3 2024’s $27.4 million, demonstrating operational leverage and efficiency.

• Cash Operating Cost: $783/oz, in line with company guidance but above prior quarters due to operational factors.

• All-In Sustaining Cost (AISC): $1,129/oz for the quarter, with the company narrowing full-year guidance to $900–$1,000 per ounce, signaling confidence in cost control despite Q3 being a higher-cost quarter.

• Gold Poured: 22,617 ounces (up from 20,110 oz in Q3 2024), showing stable production.

• Ore Processed: 250,459 tonnes at 3.11 g/t gold grade, with improved process recovery of 94.3% vs. 88.5% in Q3 2024.

• Ore Mined: 386,558 tonnes at 2.26 g/t gold, indicating continued mining activity albeit at a slightly lower grade than previous quarters.

• Cash and Equivalents: Raised significantly to $80.6 million from $12 million at year-end 2024, bolstering liquidity.

• Working Capital Surplus: $96.6 million, a stark improvement from a deficit at the prior year-end.

more here: https://thorexpl.com/site/assets/files/2920/thor-explorations-2025-q3-mda-report.pdf

Thor Explorations (THX) delivered record quarterly financial and operational results for Q2 2025, significantly outperforming typical analyst expectations for production growth, margin improvement, and cash flow generation.

Key Q2 2025 Results

• Revenue: $82.8 million, a record for the company and well ahead of the prior year ($53.9 million in Q2 2024).

• Net Profit: $51.7 million, also a record and nearly double the Q2 2024 level ($27.5 million).

• EBITDA: $60.4 million, a substantial increase compared to $37.6 million in Q2 2024.

• Gold sold: 25,900 oz (vs 23,558 oz Q2 2024), reflecting strong production and market demand.

• Average realised gold price: $3,187/oz (significantly above both the prior-year $2,309/oz and many analyst forecasts that typically assume gold prices closer to $2,000–$2,500/oz).

• Cash operating cost: $715/oz; AISC: $915/oz (the cost base remains competitive despite sector-wide inflationary pressures, supporting robust margins at higher gold prices).

• Cash and equivalents: $52.9 million, more than quadrupled from year-end 2024 ($12 million).

More here: https://thorexpl.com/site/assets/files/2893/thor_explorations_q2_2025_mda_report_v2_yj_amends_-_215pm_110825.pdf

Progressing from R&D proof-of-concept into commercial negotiation is a key de-risking step, potentially validating the IP and accelerating monetisation opportunities.

• If successful evaluations or contracts materialise, QBT could generate initial licensing revenues or cement its technology as a standard in next-generation mining rigs, which may support a re-rating.

• The move to advanced discussions also implies QBT has satisfied technical diligence hurdles required by prospective partners—a frequent stumbling block for early-stage technology companies in this space.

The RNS and business updates indicate two ASIC manufacturers are already conducting or about to begin in-depth assessments of QBT’s Method C for integration into new and existing miner designs, under the terms of NDAs.

Potential US Partners: Likely Candidates

• ASIC Manufacturers: Given QBT’s stated focus and the US “new wave” of ASIC miner producers present at these conferences, likely candidates include companies like MicroBT (WhatsMiner, US presence), Bitmain’s US partners, and potentially new US-headquartered entrants targeting Bitcoin mining chip development.

• Mining Pools: Leading US-based pools include Foundry USA, a subsidiary of DCG and the largest Bitcoin mining pool in terms of hashrate, and similar major platforms that would benefit directly from any mining efficiency gain.

• Publicly Traded Miners: Large operators such as Marathon Digital, Core Scientific, CleanSpark, Riot Platforms, Cipher Mining, and Iris Energy all have significant US operations and would be plausible strategic or beta deployment partners

QBT’s strategy, based on its RNS disclosures, is to enter collaborative tests with both ASIC manufacturers and aftermarket control board suppliers—providing technical integration kits for their proprietary environments, which enables large-scale partners to deploy QBT’s novel methods across their miner fleets after proving efficiency gains. This access potentially unlocks rapid market penetration if formal deals are signed, as partners are “just waiting for real-time” performance and demonstration milestones.

Net cash inflow for the interim period was £1.1 million (from operations and financing).

• £2.4 million was raised from a capital issue during the period.

• There was a reduction in payables and an increase in R&D spending, consistent with progression in R&D-heavy development (such as today’s Method C software release).

Runway Assessment

• Given the capital raise and cash at hand over the summer, the company is likely funded into at least mid-2026, assuming a cash burn trajectory similar to past periods

Drop way overdone as usual.

Fantastic news and a significant commercial opportunity. Contract RNS to follow in due course.

• Roche Diagnostics Division sales ~ $7 billion H1 2025

• Oncology blood-based tests market global size ~$5.9 billion (2025)

• Roche likely capturing 10-15% of diagnostics revenue from blood-based oncology tests

• Estimated Roche blood-based oncology test revenue in 2025: $700 million to $1 billion USD range

This figure provides a meaningful revenue base that Parsortix technology could tap into if increasingly adopted by Roche

The question is why load now when the placing has been announced?

"Expert consensus predicts integration of CTC testing into routine clinical practice within 5 years." The clear recognition by independent experts is a critical value inflection point, likely to accelerate clinical adoption and partnerships, which historically have been the bottleneck for widespread liquid biopsy platforms.

• With integration into routine clinical practice expected in the medium term, the addressable clinical and biopharma services market for CLBX may expand rapidly, supporting a steeper revenue growth trajectory versus prior projections based solely on lab-developed test services or pharma collaborations. Perhaps the 37p isn't a pipe dream.

• Notably, a capital raise of around £6m by December 2025 will give the resources to capitalise on this momentum with expanded commercial operations.

There is an even stronger investment case.

They only need to raise funds if they don't close a deal, and there are several in the pipeline outlined in their investor presentation.

We seem to be stuck in a cynical vortex of SAR's efforts and intentions on this BB. But perhaps there is just maybe a deal incoming for one of the compounds.

This update affirms Hemogenyx’s commitment to advancing its innovative therapies with positive safety evaluations, strengthening the investment case and will see new investment eventually. The DSMB has approved escalation in the Phase I trial of HG-CT-1, confirming safety at the initial dose level, enabling further dose escalation.

• The trial’s progress advances the clinical development of their AML therapy, reducing regulatory and clinical risks.

• The trial also allows recruitment of pediatric patients at the same dose level, broadening potential market access.

• The company has granted 6,000 RSUs to team members, aligning incentives to support trial progression.

• Continued clinical milestones and safety reviews underline ongoing progress in their pipeline, providing reassurance on project de-risking .

Q3 2025 earnings release on November 7, 2025, which could act as a catalyst for further share price movement.

TRLS achieved far more than “almost nothing” since the 2021 raise. The company has developed a unique, resilience-driven care management platform, significantly enhanced the app’s functionality and interoperability, and established evidence-based outcomes data that underpin its value proposition. Notably, the positive results from their IBS trial demonstrated meaningful symptom improvement and patient engagement, reinforcing the clinical effectiveness of their approach. Importantly, they’ve transitioned from a single B2C pilot into a legitimate B2B model — signing partnerships with payers, employers, and now global CROs like the one announced recently.

On the contract itself, it’s worth remembering that commercial confidentiality is standard practice. The J&J collaboration last year led to a sharp, disproportionate share price spike — which is exactly why companies in early stages often avoid naming partners or disclosing deal values. Reasons, as I'm sure you're aware, include NDAs imposed by the counterparties, protection of negotiating positions for follow‑on deals, and maintaining competitive advantage as they pursue other large contracts.

While the recent RNS didn’t provide headline numbers, it clearly signalled a step into a scalable upstream model and multiple parties undertaking due diligence, suggesting meaningful commercial traction. The current deal may not immediately extend the cash runway, but it validates the commercial model, which in turn derisks future negotiations and potential raises on better terms. Perhaps the upfront payment isn't enough, and we don't know what else is being negotiated.

The reality is that TRLS has shifted from product completion to real customer adoption in a high‑value healthcare segment — a logical foundation for asymmetric upside as new contracts land.