Member Info for neilin62

Evening VincentVega / Fastfood

re the issue of holdings / TR1's etc -

The onus is on the holder to inform the market if thresholds are crossed. 99% of them abide by the rules, but there will always be the odd one that doesn't.

In the case of nominee accounts, it is extremely difficult for them to monitor daily changes to their holdings due to the variation of daily traded volume, which is why they only update occasionally, when thresholds are crossed.

The company can only update the significant holders if they are informed and 100% certain, to avoid double counting.

You may find a post i made on 25/19/22 helpful in explaining. It also gives an example of why you won't see TR1's when you expect them.

The reason they buys / sells are not accurate is London Stock Exchange does not register buys or sells. They simply register trades.

The buys and sells you see on here are the result of an algorithm that looks at the median price of the ask and the bid, and "guesses" that anything below is a sell, and anything above is a buy. Which we all know is rubbish, as we have all seen "sells" when someone has actually bought.

Neil

Nothing new in this latest report - apart from their results appear to be getting worse not better. Look at 2 posts in particular i made regarding this 15/02/23@ 00:49 & 18/03/23 @09:19

- not accurate enough to rule in or rule out cancer -

A number of medical professionals have indicated their concerns over the claims being made over their headline grabbing accuracy

Also the continuing legal case of the order to unwind Grail from Illumina latest is that the FTC have overturned a decision that went Galleri's way, and they are now in all sorts of trouble.

To add to their woes, activist investors are demanding resignations of certain board members, and putting their own members in, following disastrous financial accounts/share price drop

Neil

There was nothing in that RNS that could be construed as a pump.

All the contents were previously communicated, and the purpose of the RNS was simply an acknowledgement of the SEC filing.

The suggestion that it was pumped to 4.8 is not right in my opinion. That was a rise purely on speculation following Martin Lang 's holding notification. - well before that date.

Yes people are disappointed with the share price as it stands, and i will agree with that - so am i ! i would love nothing more than to see it rise to where it should be. Even Allan himself has said he is disappointed with the share price, and if anyone should know where the true value should be, it will be him.

Yes things have taken a long time, but this is phama - things don't happen quickly, and i would imagine we would have been in a much better position if it wasn't for the effect the Covid pandemic had on the world. Especially China with a near zero tolerance policy for a year. That alone put us back from the start.

I have asked a further question, but it was a bit too specific, so not sure they will be able to answer specifically, but i would personally expect news before too much longer.

Neil

Widglide, the company RTO'd May 13th 2021 , so 2 years and 3 weeks, not 3.5 years.

Joe_Bloggs_ , times your loss by something like 160 and you would be somewhere near where i am, but i am not bemoaning that fact.

Look at the accounts to Dec 31 and see if you can work out what was spent, where it was spent, and why.

Look at the trades recently. Do you believe them? Do you know who's hands they are going to?

Stop hanging on every little tick up or down. It will come when it it is ready. The BOD don't sit on information because it suits them, conversely, they don't issue RNS's because a small number of PI's have p***ed their pants because the share price is down that day.

News will come when news is available.

Neil

LB - good evening if you are looking in.

Your earlier post re the Nasdaq Global - i don't think that is the segment that the new listing will list on. I think it will be Capital Markets, as that segment is more specifically targeted at "blank cheque " SPAC's , which is what Conduit / Murphy is.

I also completely agree with OAPK20's post earlier in that there is NO shortfall on the MCAP requirement.

From the comments i have read from other posters, i think they have focused on the initial $136m, aand the subsequent redemptions, and appear to have overlooked the "PIPE investment" of $27m, so not an issue in my opinion.

Well done OAPK20 for noting this.

Neil

Joe_Bloggs_

the shares i was referring to are the first £500,000 funding tranche. Re Jace's TR1 point, we may never see one, as there wasn't one in the first place when the shares were issued. This points to the reason being, that although the funding was provided by a single entity, it consisted of individual investors, who would not need to inform TR1 threshold status if below 3% each. Guess we will know by Tuesday /wednesday to see if a TR1 does appear.

The conduit / murphy deal is a side issue, as that was always an add on revenue stream to our core business.

For what it is worth, i have asked the BOD a number of queries on timescales, finance, holdings, and agreements, amongst others, but the answer was that if they revealed such information, i would be classed as an insider so they can't say anything.

Announcements will be made via RNS when able to do so.

Neil

........Obviously those selling don’t believe in the product delivering…

So you haven't considered the possibility that the holders of the subscription shares under the funding @1.5p may be realising their asset? Even at 2.4 - 2.6p that's still a heathy return on an investment so short a timescale?

Let's see what happens

Neil

Hi again Fastfood

The 3 "stages" are the development of the ELISA.

It's hard to say at what stage we are in the process, as the 3 stages are not clearly defined with specific fixed boundaries.

i.e. some aspects of optimisation are also in the process of 'validation', and some aspects of both are in the stage of standardisation.

Add into this equation the fact that aspects of all 3 stages can include retrospective data (which we have a lot of) then we may have a good proportion of the requirements of each stage already.

So it is perfectly reasonable to assume that we could be well into stage 2, or even stage 3 at this point.

This retospective dat is of great importance to us, as , along with the test being developed as a LDT, reliance can be made of this data in an application for UKCA/CE marking and FDA clearance under 510(k)

Neil

Hi Bearsandbulls

NHS hands are tied at the minute, as we don't have the test available yet to get them into use.

However, i can ASSURE you that they are well aware of Cizzle Biotechnology, and it's test.

Moreover, we are moving towards market launch and preparation for a clinical trial to support the NHS.

Neil

Hi Fastfood

It' a slightly better deal than that.

For China, you are correct, the royalty is 10% . However, it's not just 10% on the kits. We will also be paid for the supply of the reagents and antibodies for use in those kits.

The figure of $100 is just a figure suggested previously by Allan, and could be more - could be less. $100 is still very cheap (Grail test ha,ha is being charged at $949 so you can see how far we can position our test at)

China test will not (in my opinion) be sold in the NHS, as the complexities of sorting out the royalty payments between them supplying to their own country, and then back into UK would be difficult to manage. Far easier to let China supply their kit in China, and UK to sell in UK. This would also be impacted by the different regulatory arrangements for approval / acceptance required regarding UK/CE/FDA

We will be free to supply into UK and EU market (subject to the approvals) at whatever price point is decided.

Us deal is 15% royalty as bearsandbulls says, but... the good thing about this deal is that it will be marketed by Benhke who will only be paid on results. So the emphasis on getting it in front of clinicians is on them, to perform.

Personally, i do not think there is any question of whether the optimisation "is successful". I believe it already has been, and has been proven to work in previous studies and reported papers.

LB, i could not get an order for my shares to go through at the quantity i required, so i had to split it into seperate trades too.

Neil

Or maybe some people read the account to 31st December 2022 submitted to Companies House on Tuesday.

I particularly like the paragraph ....

"Decision: to build a portfolio of early cancer detection tests, companion diagnostics and royalty bearing stakes in significant drug assets whilst also creating an option to realise these investments in the short term"

I have added yet more to my holding over the last few days.

Neil

Hi Fastfood

I noticed this a while back and asked the company to confirm, along with a number of other queries i had.

The answer is:

The significant shareholder page on the website reflects the shareholder register, i.e. the legal owners of the shares, including nominees. TR1s are different in that they reflect beneficial ownership or more accurately control of voting rights. We can only go on the register itself in listing the significant shareholders, unless we are 100% sure of the relevant nominee position. To do anything different would include double counting. For example with Mr Miller we don’t know which different nominees he holds his shares in.

Best regards

Neil

Evening all.
thanks for the vote of confidence Vincent Vega.
My opinion on the time taking for optimization is as follows:
i believe optimization is complete (that doesn't require RNS just yet as it doesn't constitute a financially material event) However, there is more to the process as just the optimization stage. Following optimization, as a new device, requires Validation, and then Standardization.
If you read a cited open access paper DOI.10.5772/intechopen .94338 this gives you the stages, and explanation of what we need to do. My thoughts are that we are in these stages. This view is supported somewhat by Allan Syms comments recently in RNS ...
"The current research programme has MET some critical milestones especially in optimizing the platform and antibodies....."
"....builds on SUCCESSFUL OUTCOMES of current research programme for monoclonal antibodies and platform optimization"
The reagents/antibodies are common to both the China project, and the US project. However, we do already know that we have engaged other manufacturers (CRO's) to develop further variants of the CIZ1B platform in order to increase our range of cancer detection. We are building a library of reagents/antibodies.
I have recently read a paper on the various Exon splices (CIZ1_F, CIZ1-S etc) that have been shown to be a good identifier of breast cancer and colon cancers, so that may also be a reason that optimization is seeming to be a long drawn out process.
LB yes, the holy grail here is to ultimately develop the test to be a lateral flow type which is what the BOD have in their minds. But as you note, this is only one aspect of what is possible. Mention has been made on more than one occasion that we are developing into the therapeutic side of cancer as well as diagnostic. - another huge opportunity.
I have seen the new posters "what news is due" and placing comments.........come on, do a bit of research, or at the very least spend some time reading up on previous posts please!
Placing? we are funded well into 2024, even without the prospective £3.25 million from the put option, the additional £500,000 finance option, £200,000 on commencement of the companion diagnostic test , up to £1 million in fees for the same, and up to £5 million in royalty payments. That is before any proceeds from the supply of the reagents and antibodies to China and USA, not to mention the royalty payments from those too when we commercialize!!!
Note.... previous communications from the company always stated developing the test for "CE and/or FDA 510 (k) clearance. Anybody noticed that they now say UKCA, CE marking, LDT and/or FDA 510 (k) ? A subtle difference, but very important. NHS here we come......
Now you may laugh at this one, but did you know that the market for Vetinary oncology is currently $364 million and predicted to grow 8% per year?
Neil

Ah, apologies LB, i was thinking that you meant i referred to either Allan or Dawn speaking.
Yes, the reference i made was about FJB being the hosts of that particular series, and the fact that the are involved with us.
Now i,m not saying that come September/October that the BOD will announce " here is the test" (although that would be entirely possible, and amazing if they did) but given the companies involved in the San Diego conference, i think it would be a massive PR boost for us to reveal something, and the timings/people/etc are a heck of a coincidence.

Just on timelines, i have been thinking that there is a possibility that news from China may come before USA.
Reason behind this thinking is the way that the deal with ICCAMT has been structured. To all intents and purposes, China have effectively created a completely separate company and as such will be more inclined to get to market sooner rather than later, as they already have a pilot trial designed and ready to go.

I have many reports open, interviews , etc, and in one of them i have definitely heard that discussions have/ are taking place on at least 2 fronts with the NHS, BUT CAN I FIND THE DAMN THING?
I have even seen TV news reports in India and ****stan about Cizzle so there is sure to be interest in the Indo-Asia market in the future.
(yes, i know, i need to get out more!)
Sometime in the very near future, i am sure that we will see an RNS informing us that we have entered into agreements with UK partner(s) to get our test into NHS.
All very exciting.
Neil

Evening LB
Iv'e looked at so many possible events, and tried to tie up appearances/speakers (particularly Allan and / or Dawn) with them to see if there is any link, that i don't remember Portugal specifically (forgive me if i'm wrong)
Some of the info is available free as you found, but others are by subscription, or restricted to medical professionals.

At the end of the day though it is about who is networking with who in these events, and getting as much exposure of Cizzle to as many of the key decision makers as possible, so i don't place any particular emphasis on one, This is because some of the guests/speakers at one event may well have been present at another where our BOD aren't, but they in turn may pass on info they picked up.
The one in San Diego however, struck a chord due to the possible timing of certain events, as i suggested. - All in my opinion of course as i am just trying to make sense of any tenuous links.
Neil
ps Joe _Bloggs
There is no condition that the merger has to happen by September. If it hasn't, then we still retain the right to take up the
option whenever they do list.

Neil

Hi Greend100
As far as i can determine, the full report is not available as the results were given in a "proffered paper" ( i.e, a digital) presentation at the ESMO conference in Paris. There are however a number of "summary" conclusions available on line by way of reports submitted by various bodies.
Neil

Remember the timeline i suggested in my post (30/03/2023 @23:29)?
Guess who has been confirmed as speaker 12 - 13th October at the US Biomarkers conference in San Diego?
Yes, our very own Dr Dawn Coverley.

Good timing or what?

Neil

Hi Greend100
I posted about the ongoing battle with Illumina / Grail previously on a number of occasions.
It has gone way past FTC involvement, and is now also under investigation by EU

On the sensitivity, i also posted a number of posts regarding this, and the various claims and results, and the sensitivity at different stages, and different cancers.
Have a look back.... you may understand why i am so positive about our product(s)
Neil

Allan Syms been busy
Another live interview on Research Talks AT 6:PM tonight.
Neil

Morning VincentVega,
The 6 months i believe, is the time to get the test into clinical trial.
Clinical trials can be for various lengths of time depending on the specifics, number of subjects, etc.
However, the bit to focus on is not how long the trials will last, but the fact that from this 6 months stated, the test will gain LDT status, and is therefore eligible to be commercially marketable.
i.e. we can start selling them (commercially only at that point, but that is what we have been striving for., - to get it out there in the market)
Hope this helps
Neil