We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
Scrambler
"This is not a trading company whereby the trading results have been poor due to incompetent management. 4D's output is scientific results. To date they have not dissapointed!"
This isn't a university team OR a research institution either. It's a listed company FFS. They haven't disappointed on the clinical side. They have all the ammunition from the scientific team to do very well on the commercial side! Will they?
The start has to happen from the presentation which is hardly an investor pitch!
4D deserves to succeed but it may not happen with investor apathy!
By the way, one's target returns are totally irrelevant to this discussion.
correction: sorry meant a few US$ hundreds of thousand
So if Res 3 gets rejected (increasingly likely), it'd be interesting to see whether directors have to refund the company for the non-approved part of their salary (since the increase was granted). Depending on when the increased kicked-in, it might bring a few US$ millions back into the coffers!
Now, if they manage to bring in non-dilutive financing or achieve another success up to the AGM, I'll make sure my vote re
Res 3 gets amended.
Stable disease outcomes are indeed noteworthy though I was also surprised about the responses, or actually the lack of them. The surprise was because in the Feb 2021 RNS they talked about " Target tumor reductions in Part B patients have been observed as patients reach the first scheduled restaging timepoint (nine weeks). "
That's one of the intended questions for the AGM if I get the chance.
Sangi, I accept what you say that it was an oversight and not an attempt to misinform. If anything, your post prompted me to look more carefully at the notice!
PS. You said more than once that you'd be around well past the time when most of the investors would have gone...was it that stipulation in the Oxford Finance agreement that made so much difference?! Anyway, trust you'll let us know when you buy back in ... one can tell you are finding it difficult to stay away :-)
https://www.4dpharmaplc.com/en/investors/financial-calendar
Contrary to what was stated earlier today (a case of spreading misinformation?), resolution 8 allowing for the company to issue 100% shares is an ORDINARY one: i.e. it gets passed with simple majority of 50% +1 vote (see below - extract from the document accessible through the link above)
Resolution 9 is a special one (requiring >75% and would allow the company to skip existing shareholders AND it is contingent upon Resolution 8 passing.
Resolution 3 has to do with approving the serious increases in directors' remuneration.
For what it's worth, I've voted NO to 9 & 3 and YES to 8.
From the notice:
"BUSINESS OF THE MEETING
The Notice of AGM below sets out the items of business to be considered at the AGM. Explanatory notes on all the business to be
considered at the AGM are set out below.
Resolutions 1 to 8 are proposed as ordinary resolutions. This means that, for each of those resolutions, more than half of the votes cast must be in favour of each resolution.
Resolutions 9 and 10 are proposed as special resolutions. This means that, for each of those resolutions to be passed, at least threequarters of the votes cast must be in favour of each resolution"
RichieRich & Soundsrisky,
Oxford Finance is, of course, NOT to fund the rest of the trials: as the few months from q4 are critical it is to provide a BRIDGE financing to either deal-making on the back of the most advanced programmes OR non-dilutive financing such as a new loan facility or co-financing from the big pharmas!
Even if the company issued fresh capital at 100% of its existing one it wouldn't be able to provide funding for the trials across its impressively diversified portfolio!!
The beauty of the diversification in the programmes is also its Achilles heel so at some point 4D has to used advanced programmes to fund earlier ones. This point has been reached in the timeline.
Most likely, there has been a strong overreaction, yes. Might there have been indications, even on this bb, of coordinated efforts to bring the price down in a way that is reminiscent of some placements? That's why it is important for 4D to communicate better and more regularly with the few investors that investors that support it consistently.
For sure we've been there before, recently (two months or so ago?). That was a The SP was going down suddenly from the 40s to 34/35p but the (implied) placement didn't happen.
Now, if Oxford Finance drawdowns were (still) a possibility at the beginning of the week they must be an option now.
In any case, I haven't sold any shares as the SP has fallen - it doesn't make sense in my opinion.
Have also voted NO to res 9 & res 3 (serious increases in directors' remuneration). Maybe Res. 3 will pass but it is important to make the point that strong rewards, of such magnitude, should happen AFTER creation of value for shareholders too, not BEFORE.
Res. 9 is to leave out the existing shareholders IF Res. 8 gets approved - Upon closer reading, Res. 8 seems to be the one that allows the company to issue shares up to 100% of current capital.
Share price graph has now pierced through lower boundary of Boll Bands, RSI close to all time low in recent weeks and all against a backdrop of a very recent... strong rising trend in the XBI biotech index!
Unless there is some sharp recovery in the next few days, does this SP fall against the odds mean something? Were there to be a placement soon, it'd better be announced - rumour is always worse than reality. Then we can look forward to unstoppable rises.
Selling the old chairs and sofas in the Merck boardroom to fund the rest of the 0518 /Keytruda trial sounds like a great plan by the way :-)
Robins
Thank you for the endorsement! I'm aiming to be there to put those questions to the Board. Really hope that as many genuine investors, as possible, can make it and that we can engage in a positive and productive discussion with Board members.
After all, we all want to see 4D succeed!
However, a change of tak and a much more proactive, business oriented, attitude may be necessary to complement the excellent work carried out on the scifentific front and the opportunities that should arise out of the forging of collaborations in clinical trials with industry stalwarts.
On paper the investment proposal of 4D still looks good - overall- despite a couple of red flags or, best to say, yellow cards. But I expect to firm up my opinion after the AGM: it's important that we invest in the right people and then in the right product.
MHB
Phil, hello again.
You're saying "Being an 'inspiration leader' is very important when attracting PIs who otherwise have no clue what they're investing in."
What you state is only a small side benefit or effect. The role of being a "Leader" and an inspirational one in particular is broad and multi-faceted - and the role of such a leader is to attract SAVVY industry or financial investors. The less knowledgeable might follow the experienced ones anyway. So, I don't quite agree with you there.
Now, a lot of credit should be given to Duncan, as well as Alex probably, for bringing big pharma partners to the table to work with 4D and negotiating such partnerships. That's why I said that he could fit well into the role of a COO (Chief Operations Officer). So we don't do badly on the credibility front.
However, a CEO who's a good strategist thinks where the business should aim at being in 2,3, and 5 years time and what its business model should be i.e. how its revenues will be earned. Then he sets in motion the plan and the shorter-term tasks to implement it. What should 4D become in 2-3 years time? A medium sized pharma with first (JV) products in the market with continuing R&D on the side? Or an IP powerhouse selling its products as they re well advanced into phase II? Or ... do we think that an exit through a take over is preferable? In the latter case we'd need the price tension and to attract a number of putative buyers, not just one (e.g. MSD).
If you look at the milestones set by 4D itself (annual report RNS), commercial milestones are conspicuous by their absence! i.e. at what stage in the time horizon of the various programmes do we target JV/licensing deals? Do we wait for FDA for ever in case of Blautix?! Are we aiming to be the R&D partner of big pharmas and if so to what extent AND what's in it for us? It is difficult to tell but I'd say we haven't thought those points well. So calling Duncan a good strategist is generous at this stage (but could well be wrong there).
At the moment are we mainly working towards making further progress on trials. That would mean we are focussing (mostly) on what we know we do well and in our comfort zone i.e. our product, our technology. That's essential of course but not enough: it's like steering a boat in the ocean without a direction. I'm exaggerating a bit to make the point!
Finally, a strong CEO drafts jointly with CFO a sound short/medium and long term financial plan. If one looks at the destruction of shareholder value over the years (even with SP at 110-150p, pre-sector fall) compared to the progress on the clinical front, we are not doing well there, are we?
This is not to criticise but the time has come to have a PRODUCTIVE discussion with management re various issues. Do we investors miss something or is it the market (IIs) who's not really convinced by 4D ... YET?
MH
Phil for a company which has the size of 4d, Duncan as CEO should be spearheading efforts to bring in IIs (be it through the secondary market or otherwise). Investors invest in people first and then in great products or technology. I think that Duncan would be much more suitable in a Chief Operations Officer type of role (assuming he is organised enough). However as a CEO he doesn't seem to be the inspirational type of leader (eg what are the medium term strategic objectives of the company?!) nor does he seem to be sufficiently focused on the commercial front or bringing in heavyweight IIs . That's a shame as we have a great medical technology that cries out for better promotion and commercial tapping into!!
Certainly a lot to answer at the AGM. In a nutshell:
- why does excellence on the clinical & development get almost muted when it comes to the investor base - the company relies now exclusively on retail investors which doesn't make sense for the stage it is at; The biotech market hasn't been booming, granted. However, it is FAR from dead and we should have strong credentials to get in front of the queue when pitching.
- why no IBS commercial deal after ... 2.5 years of phase II conclusion with strong results (apparently)?!
- why the very significant pay rises and the options for directors (not questioning the ones for the staff) without concrete results on the commercial front?
- does the current funding strategy involve plans to have big partners foot the bill OR are retail investors going to be funding R&D that is important for MSD ... and other big pharmas?
- can we have broker reports explaining clearly and in detail the clinical programmes, the general 4D strategy, the financing plan and targeted commercial milestones?
(as of close yesterday)
SPDR S&P Biotech ETF
NYSEARCA: XBI 72.60 USD
+3.42 (4.94%)today
If one takes a look at the 1m and the 1yr graphs, there are signs of recovery from the 62.8 level on 11th May 2022. Looking at the 5 year graph, one could see that the recent low is broadly at the level of the other 5 years lows so, again, might we be seeing the beginning of an upward trend?
Question is whether 4D follows the trend: if XBI carries on upwards and 4D continues to be at odds with the index, it will beg the question why.
Let's see whether 4D follows the index.
Even 3 to 4 months extra runway from the second drawing under Oxf Fin can go a long way at such a critical stage in the lifetime of 4D when a number of important milestones (clinical or commercial) are expected.
Then, let's not forget there is a third instalment potentially under Oxf Fin facility. If drawn, that's an extra 3-6 months.
Most of all though, satisfying the second drawdown conditions would be a further endorsement of the company and its business in the eyes of investors, putative investors and the industry: the OF facility is a smart one ie further drawdowns are linked to strong and tangible progress in the business!
Having said that, further Oxf Fin facility drawdowns are not in the bag and 4d does face a financing risk - manageable though in my view.
The most critical piece of (good) news in the short-run, at least on the clinical front, may well come from NSCLC.
Doing well on the NSCLC is a binary outcome: is there at some observed benefit for at least 10% of patients in the trial? It's going to come to a "yes" or a "no "sooner or later.
A positive outcome on NSCLC should unlock Oxford Finance facility. That's provided that at the same time, at least one patient in the Bavencio trial receives treatment - hardly an insurmountable task!
Unlocking the Oxford Facility means share price gets on the runway for take off as we get bridge financing to a number of other possible milestones such as potential news regarding: Bavencio trial, initiation of Parkinson trial, asthma, commercial deals and the vaccines collaboration.
More importantly, such success ought to seal some kind of partnership / deal between MSD and 4d vis-a-vis 0518 - already, as it stands, the likelihood of a deal is high given the benefits of 0518 in RCC cohort. NSCLC though is one of the biggest applications of Keytruda, at least if one goes by revenues. And, Keytruda is one of the top oncology drugs worldwide.
Still, not talking about take over as I think this is on the off-chance - usually happens when you least expect it, if it does. Before that, 4d should do what it does best for as long as possible as an innovative stand-alone entity.
https://www.4dpharmaplc.com/en/clinical/clinical-trials ... out of three cases there was one in which there was some kind of observed benefit in NSCLC. Is it too much to expect to observe one in ten benefit (of some form) in part B especially with the experience gained from part A?
Hi Asterix (the Gaul?)
Let's be clear: if you read my posts in their entirety, I have an issue with BOTH i.e. a potential issue equal to 100% of the current number of shares AND the possibility that it may not include a rights issue.
In a nutshell, I'm saying is the following: I trust that the directors would only resort to a (dilutive) capital increase as a safety net (though, once more, 40% should be enough!). IF a capital increase is unavoidable and we didn't manage to get funding otherwise, it would be unacceptable not to include existing shareholders.
Your probably have read the following from the notice:
"Having the freedom to be able to raise capital in a timely manner will align the Company with US listed biotech companies which do not have to comply with statutory pre-emption rights"
I'm hoping though this discussion is theoretical as the company is focussing its energy on non-dilutive options.
I see this is your first ever post. Are you an investor in 4D?
Best,
MHB
Fforestgwmp,
I understand where you come from.
First, the chances are that res. 9 is an overconservative safety net which could be relied upon if non-dilutive options for funding (incl. Oxford Finance further drawdowns) haven't worked out and the company needs to move very quickly to secure funding - at least that's my take on it.
Now, a rights issue might take bit more time or it might not if coordinated in parallel with rest of fundraising arrangements.
So res. 9 may never be applied in practice if it's only a safety net. But, it's a matter of principle and fairness: the investors that have supported the company and stop its SP from falling further, shouldn't they be given the chance to buy into a share? I'm overweight 4D too though would still want the chance to take part in a fundraising likely to take place at a bargain price AND, after which, the SP is likely to take off. It could be an easy (top slice) trade for some or for others the chances to beef their holding. But, we should be given the chance.
Overall I probably have more of an issue with the exclusion of 4D's existing investor base rather than the 100% issuance limit which I think is too high even as a safety net.
Further to today's RNS, we are effectively satisfying 3 out of 4 criteria that would unlock the second instalment under the OF loan facility:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1830162/000149315221022583/ex10-14.htm (p.40 and see below)
(i) (A) PASSED!
(i) (B) THE STEP AWAY: we need one patient out of ten in non-small cell lung cancer cohort to see a clinical benefit
(ii) (EFFECTIVELY) PASSED: ASSUMING AT LEAST ONE PATIENT (!) GETS RECRUITED UNDER THE MRx0518/BAVENCIO PHASE II TRIAL WHICH IS NOW OPEN.
(iii) PASSED: POSITIVE TOPLINE DATA MRx4DP0004 ACHIEVED SO ROAD SHOULD BE OPEN TO PHASE B
"Second Draw Period Commencement Date” is the earliest date by which all of the following have been accomplished to Collateral Agent’s reasonable satisfaction: (i) Borrower achieving (A) positive data, including at least a 10% observed clinical benefit, in the Phase II trials of Borrower’s product candidate MRx0518 plus Keytruda in at least 20 patients with renal cell carcinoma (2 patients out of 20) and (B) positive data, including at least a 10% observed clinical benefit, from the non-small cell lung cancer cohort of at least 10 patients (1 patient out of 10); (ii) first patient dosed in Borrower’s product candidate MRx0518’s Urothelial Carcinoma Phase II trial in combination with Bavencio (avelumab); and (iii) Borrower’s product candidate Blautix advancing into a Phase 3 trial or Thetanix advancing into a Phase 2 trial, or Borrower achieving positive topline data sufficient to advance Borrower’s product candidate MRx4DP0004 into Part B of the Phase I trial in asthma. "
It would be very good news indeed if we end up receiving that non-dilutive funding from Oxford Finance which would provide a bridge into all the major milestones for late 2022 and 2023 possibly even into self financing! There might be other non-dilutive options though.
Hi crl123
I'm inclined to agree with you there. Overall though I remain optimistic but there are questions that need answering. Hopefully, the AGM will be such a forum.