RE: News blackout25 Feb 2024 12:47
@Pj666
And you believe this to be a realistic possible outcome because….
Now as most here know I’m not afraid to voice my OPINION on this penny share but I’m just not convinced we really have full clarity from the BOD regarding the 201 positions. I’m not suggesting shareholders are being lied to, I’m suggesting that like a lot of AIM companies the BOD are not necessarily volunteering all information so SH can form an accurate view.
Perhaps the resident bulls would like to contra any of these points because I think anyone considering buying this penny share needs to consider them, it could also be a factor why Suzy herself wont make a meaningful investment : -
Regarding the THX and EUDA merger: 1. The due diligence period ended before the end of December. 2. The EUDA update did not mention talks were ongoing. 3. Even if now they merged, they still must go on and raise cash no guarantees 4. The new created legal entity would have the right to re-negotiate terms with VAL further, they would owe it to their new SH to do so. 5. In current market conditions and on the basis that they would need best part of £25m to fund phased trials for 201 the new entity would be within their rights to request success only payments and no upfront cash. The market conditions have changed materially in that period.
Regarding the licensing of 201: 1. The drug will soon be 15 years old and likely now well superseded by other drugs. 2. The IPR rights on 201 according to GS expired and new patents have not been filed. 3. 201 likely needs re-patenting and/or re-formulating now in any event 4. During the last two plus years as far as I know VAL have neglected to do point 3 unless anyone has evidence to the contrary 4. IF VAL left this with THX to do it, where is it registered and who is the registrant? 5. IMO 201 is not in position to be licensed by a new EUDA entity in its current state.
Now obviously you can ignore the above points, its only my OPINION as I say, I could be totally wrong, but I think come the AGM these questions should at least be raised, the BOD should give SH full clarity. IF 201has been left without a patent on it, anyone can copy it IMO rendering it next to worthless and I would want to know exactly what the BOD have been doing with it the last three years. What have they done to protect the IPR and SH interests.
Finally, yes, the statement “Suzy sees no reason why the Euda merger wouldn’t go ahead” is probably factually correct. BUT has the question to EUDA been asked; “are you still in talks with THX to proceed with the merger.” Is 201 still in a position to be licensed now that its previous patents have all expired. The decision made to partner with THX really has proved to be a total shambles IMO and its tragic the BOD are still allowing the situation to continue.
Pork's