Member Info for NettlesTheCat

Apologies, wrong forum!

Not that I trust AI at all, but even that seems to back up the idea of a confident support:

"Based on the latest reports from late 2025 and early 2026, ImmuPharma PLC is actively engaged in negotiations to secure a partnership deal for its P140 (Lupuzor™) platform, having extended its target timeline for a deal from the end of 2025 into 2026. The company is experiencing strong interest from both top 10 global pharmaceutical companies and medium-sized firms following a "groundbreaking" patent filing in September 2025."

Makes me think this information of a 10 year license (which has obviously been turned down or is out for continued dialogue) since November is correct and worthy of debate whilst every visible RNS remains quiet.

"Well it’s probably linked to spod price nettles. Back at 0.88p, the lithium price was on fire. "

Fully agree sir, if they had a mine. At that time there was zero - not even a single assay back then. It was based on the media attention for lithium (at that time) due to government (silly) requirements of us all to have EVs by 2025.

A fully fledged mine with 4/5 years off take at $25m per shipment at 95% payment at port with the remainder being paid within days of destination? We know that's now the case and still it doesn't move in the way it should do.

If it doesn't move with the balance sheet suggesting the increase on the next Q results then I might have to sell as there is no reasonable suggestion to say this should be sitting at 80m Mcap.

If anything, KOD should be looking at a consolidation in my humble opinion. They should have done so with the Mali approval for license.

0.35p share with a 70m Mcap? That's crying out for a consolidation but they didn't/haven't done so.

Makes me think Hainan are holding strings we cannot see.

"@NettlesTheCat but since you first started investing how much dilution of shares has occurred? What is 0.8 range then worth now? As you said the results aren't in the financial report yet and that's maybe what everyone waits for"

No dilution. They've stayed the same. I know, sounds odd doesn't it?

I love optimism.

But being the realistic investor I am, let's look at that 0.8.

Hands up, I invested at 0.09 originally with top ups to a big investment for me (pension to SIPP released funds), and that price was 0.35p. Top ups where 0.24, 0.28 etc

When I sat on 0.09 alone, this went to 0.84p on a pre mine, pre off take (obviously) and pre license - now we know that is 4/5 years.

We now also know, post the 0.09p SP about the Hainan situation (stake in KOD PLC at 14.49%) and stake in KMUK at 51%.

So yes, most of agree that this is well undervalued, but if KOD PLC can reach 0.84p on a pre-mine, pre-licence, and pre off take with KMUK, why is it hovering between 0.35p and 0.65p?

That is the simple question I guess we all want answering, so to simply suggest "this is a 0.80p share" is lovely and wonderful, where unicorns and rainbows come from, but it's not currently reality.

I have suggested it is because the funds are yet to show on balance sheets for the upcoming quarter statements but there is something holding this share back (in my humble opinion) and I like facts. Facts I can base investments on.

This hasn't gone the way I thought it was post all those major inclusions to its mining activities so are we all missing something? Or is it simply the case, as stated above, that financials haven't been reported yet?

No opinion here, just worthy knowledge that needs to be addressed before we suggest a target figure.

No hate, I hope that is worthy knowledge. 👍

"Nettles don’t worry about the integrity of the info. Me, like all others, are only interested in whether it is credible. Nothing more, I assure you."

Again, fully understand and acknowledged OTM.

"Nettles don’t apologise for the space consumption, just wish you had shared your intel in more detail to make it more, or less, credible."

As I've said, I will never do so. And yes, you are 100% correct that means it could come from someone down the pub or someone with knowledge.

To keep it legal, I will say the knowledge is actual open source (out there to everyone to some degree) and so no infringements have been made on this occasion.

My gain from this is to acknowledge the sorts that frequent this forum, and absolutely no hate from me here, but I'd have expected more intelligent debate.

"Nettles you didn’t really have to explain the patent issue. There is no patent and I would expect one until 2027/28. Could be wrong on that timeline."

Last comment on this mate - it's patent pending. Nobody else in their right mind will infringe on what IMM have without a massive lawsuit.

Anyway, I'm out, sorry for taking up so much space this evening. 👍

OTM:

"Nettles I don’t think there is any hate from anyone … it is just a bold and random claim that you are refusing to give background to, claiming not wanting to expose your sources. You have to agree its a but of a bold one. A lot of investors are under water and desperate and others are dreaming of great riches - talk of sources sharing sensitive information will clearly have an impact on many."

It's information I had today. I entered into debate, for my sins, within the RR forum for 5 years until it got to my punt of suggesting £7 (from a 38p RI) - ask anyone, they'll back me up.... so I'm not up for personal debate buddy. I made it clear I will never give my sources, although I know that suggests either BS or nonsense to most, but on this occasion I simply asked if anyone else was privy to a November approach as most on here are far more knowledgeable than me with IMM.

I think I've given enough information to suggest this may be credible, having to explain the patent issue to you was surprise to me to be honest.

If it's chatter, it's chatter. If it's fodder, it's fodder. If it's true, and anyone else here has something likeminded to back it up, then it's worthy knowledge for us all to make decisions on our investments my friend.

Come on guys, let's get on the same level here:

"I suggest your initial post was made with good intent and for no other reason but you can see how it could be quite easily misinterpreted."

Yes, I can, and I will gracefully back away from further conversation in regard to this 👍

"Nettles fair point but the patent yet to be granted"

Pantent pending suggests nobody else can issue a like minded patent (again, layman's terms) until the patent is agreed or dismissed. This is a basic understanding of patents - some patent pending entities last years on that fact alone, with no full patent ever given.

No hate guys, but I came here to ask if you (of hopefully better knowledge) could substantiate or dismiss this November approach.

I'm not here to quote basic patent law to you - you should all know that.

Again, no hate. Just a little surprised.

I wish I was OTM 😂 I meant the 25 year patent. To me that's as good as a licence. You will know it as:

"The patent application which provides the potential for 20 years of commercial exclusivity, discloses a novel diagnostic test and precision treatment approach, identifying a subpopulation of patients with Type M immune disorder that are P140 super-responders. This approach can be used to treat up to 50 autoimmune diseases ("AutoIDs"), representing a major step forward in precision medicine." - taken from the Patent release by IMM in Sept 2025.

As we all know, patent agreements allow a 5 year 'cooling' period of this nature where any approach to do something similar (in laymans terms) often results in the current patent holder to decide to extend or relinquish the said patent (obvious license).

I shouldn't have to point this out to you.

But I could be very wrong, and this is all in my humble opinion from knowledge I have been given.... No advice here!

"Yes but no but You still havent said exactly when and where you got that info!"

Sounds like absolute BS but I'm not giving up my sources on this - Never have and never will in all my time of share dealing. I get a lot of info that is absolutely BS but this one sat well with my own theory of what we actually all know so, as I alway say in any circumstance like this, we put everything on the table and the BS gets thrown away quite quickly, to leave the truth:

1) IMM suggested an agreement prior to xmas (we all agree - FACT) - but issues RNS to say it would now be early 2026. That to me suggests any pre deal or approach wasn't good enough.

2) IMM have a guaranteed 25 year license on this (we all agree - FACT), so the deal needs to be at the uppermost of this ideal.

Most importantly:

3) Two people knowledgeable with the success of the P140 - Lupuzor (names escape me at the moment ), got 'promoted' to PR and R&D to get the best deal to warrant their patent of 25 years. The fact they couldn't get the best deal (see point one) in their time frame, suggests that an 'offer' was on the table but not good enough for RNS (hence the news of the year deal in November).

4) With this 'offer' in the bag, they prolonged the timeframe to get the best possible offer.

Now, I may, or may not, have crap information here - but any LTH here will have to argue strongly against me to say this doesn't make perfect, logical sense to where we are now.

"Nettles - Not likely that anyone on this forum will know any more about this tbh. True or not, it's an entertaining thing to be discussing while we wait for an RNS."

To be crystal, I'm looking at KOD and WSBN (with many others) on a daily basis but I often see news here I would never had know if it wasn't for being here so that was my question - news that isn't RNS or out in the public domain. To hear that IMM had a bid/offer/interest in November 2025 makes perfect sense to me. If it's wrong/fake or simply BS is disappointing to say the least, but I have always acted on my gut and that news makes perfect sense to me with reasons I have previously explained. That fact it hasn't been backed at this point may well suggest BS but I'll hold out for the next news. 👍

"Signed deal or acceptable offer rns'd and put to shareholders, offer thrown in bin no need to rns"

I'd like to agree so maybe this wasn't;t a confirmed offer but merely an early negotiation/early bid?

All I know is that it was for 10 years, and was a simple sole agreement (no external licensing allowed from IMM in that time etc) so that makes me think it was nothing more than an informal early bid (not RNS warranted).

Seriously nobody else here with more info?

"THIS IS HOW RUMOURS START !!!"

I know, I know! And I hate to read crap like this when it's a wild rumour myself, but from what I have heard, it does back up what they did last year in terms of getting the two members of staff into PR to then get a deal pre-xmas. For IMM to then say they haven't a 'secured' deal and will extend to next year (this year now) suggests this is decent information.

Again, it could be BS, but I was hoping someone here would back it up with confirmed info.

All I can say is that I'm not one to spread wild rumours. If what I hear is true then it does back up the above and suggests the quiet nature at this time (post xmas) is likely due to nothing more than finding the right deal.... I would have expected significant buys from the BOD to be honest, but I guess that should be classed as insider trading. I'm second guessing everything! 😂

I guess if this goes flat or down again tomorrow then it's nothing more that getting back to normal SP but that's a good raise today.... usually anything above 10% with no RNS suggests an RNS in the coming days?

... this went positive for me and today was that day. And news on the reason for 25% increase today?

Lots of likes but no confirmed support of that theory - is it crap?