Member Info for Professor1

*************interviews

https://www.***************************/immupharma-lupuzor-could-very-quickly-gain-traction-says-life-science-division-interview/412800545

@panamabob

Because something big is in the making, one either believes it or not

@tobler

I would agree. I believe there are bigger things happening behind the scenes.

GLA Holders

@xviolet

I have sent Lisa a follow up email but have not yet received any response. Will chase

GLA

@ roger65

Some of the biotech cos with no income stream and in Phase II or Phase III trials acquired for $Billions

Affinivax: Acquired by the pharmaceutical company GSK in 2022 for a deal worth up to $3.3 billion. At the time, Affinivax was a private biotech company with approximately 150 employees and a lead pneumococcal vaccine candidate that was in Phase II clinical trials. The company had no commercial products or income stream.

Sierra Oncology: Acquired by GSK in 2022 for nearly $2 billion. Sierra's lead drug, momelotinib, was a potential treatment for myelofibrosis. Before its acquisition, the drug had experienced mixed results under a previous owner (Gilead), but Sierra successfully advanced it through clinical trials, leading to a New Drug Application submission just before the GSK buyout. Sierra had no approved products and thus no income stream.

Karuna Therapeutics: In late 2023, Bristol Myers Squibb announced its intent to acquire Karuna Therapeutics for $14 billion to gain access to their lead asset, a schizophrenia drug that was in late-stage clinical trials (Phase III). Karuna had no revenue stream from approved drugs.

Metsera: Pfizer recently entered into an agreement to acquire Metsera for a deal valued at around $10 billion (after an initial lower bid). Metsera is a startup focused on obesity therapeutics with a lead candidate in Phase II trials. The company was privately held and had no income from product sales.

Prometheus Biosciences: Merck acquired Prometheus in 2023 for $10.8 billion to obtain its lead drug candidate, an immunotherapy for inflammatory bowel disease, which was in Phase II trials.

GLA

@Nopulus

Although you are correct in stating that Knoll had a Turnover of 2.5 billion, YOU ARE NOT PAINTING A CORRECT PICTURE. TURNOVER IS NEVER USED TO ARRIVE AT A PURCHASE PRICE OTHERWISE YOU WOULD END UP PAYING 2.5 BILLION FOR A COMPANY WHOSE NET ASSETS ARE ZERO.

I have just obtained financial statements of Knoll Pharmaceuticals for the 2000, which was a Pharma division of the chemical giant BASF.

Although Knoll made a turnover of Euro 2.5 B in year ended 31 Dec 2000, it made net income after all expenses in running that division of a mere Euro 193 million after minority intetests.

Knoll's net assets as at 31 Dec 2000 were Euro 1.8B excluding the minority interest share.

It appears that, in the Sale & Purchase Agreement, part of the purchase price of $6.9 B was allocated as follows:

A) $3.8 B to Intangibles, R& D

B) $2 B to Goodwill

The above two give a total of $5.8B. This leaves us with $1.1 B of the purchase price which must relate to the other net assets at the time of completion of the deal. Incidently, the amounts receivable by Knoll from other affiliated companies is also shown to be some Euro 1.1 B.

Therefore, most of the purchase price related to the intangibles/ R&D

GLA

@ Nolupus

I understand where you are coming from.

But, please note:

ABBOTT ACQUIRED KNOLL BEFORE HUMIRA GOT FDA APPROVAL. THE DRUG KNOWN AS D2E7 WAS, I BELIEVE, IN PHASE III

GLA

Apologies for the delay in putting this together. The kitten, Mimi, is doing great after the operation😊

One final thing I have ignored in all of the workings [ SINCE ASSUMED AN OUTRIGHT ACQUISITION] is the double digit sum, out of what IMM receives from potential partner, payable to CNRS, the French National Council for Scientific Research as I assume this will, on an acquisition, become payable by the potential partner.

(NOT INVESTMENT ADVICE)

So, IF these cashflow Revenues are indeed actually generated over the 20 year period from both the Therapeutic and Diagnostic, then the fun forecasting predicts a $10B.

$10B @ $1.31 to £1 = £7.5 B potential payment by potential partner. Compare this with the $6.9 B paid to Knoll by Abbot in 2001 twenty years ago. The question we should be asking is does P140 with its added Diagnostic model command better value than Humira based on all the management have told us in the RNSs, the GAME CHANGER FOR OVER 50 AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES

If the answer to the above is YES than the fun derived £7.5B based on total outstanding shres of 500M derives a value of £15 per share. This is all worked out for fun based on hypothetical assumptions.

@ Halfbutt, I believe you mentioned £10.!

GLA

Apologies, one typo, the 79B should read 70B so the 13B becomes 10B in the final para

@Rookie1

Perhaps the outright acquisition would be the most straight forward one considering a lot of the dd work would have begun following the opening of the data room - same as in the case of the acquisition of Knoll by Abbot for the Humira.

Talking about Humira (which produced Abbot/ Abvie $200 billion Revenue cashflows over the 20 year term), if we assume the potential partner had same total Revenues of $200 B ($10 B each year for the 20 year term) from the Therapeutic and a further $200 B ( $10 B each year for the 20 year term) from the Diagnostic , then the PV of these combined $20 B each year for the next 20 years using the assumptions in my previous note produces an PV of some $79 B. If we then take the 3.45% of $400 B total assumed Revenue cashflow for the potential partner ( i.e. equivalent to what Abbot paid Knoll for its acquisition i.e. 3.45% of $200 B =£$6.9 B), then we would get $13.8 B.

This $13.8 B arrived at based on 3.45% of the gross Revenues of $400 B is not far fetched from the normal Return percentage of between 10 % and 15% ( which I understand is commanded by Biotecs which has reached Phase III stages) of the PV of those Revenue cash flows. I.e say 15 % x the PV of $79B.

GLA

The management want to release all the results in one go when these are received from the lab. This does make sense.

The RNS also states they have flown MMT to the north west extension. This also makes sense as the company would want to capture a wider data set whilst it is waiting for the assay results, I think this will be greatly beneficial.

Here is what AI says:

Reasons for releasing all results together:

Holistic Interpretation: A single high-grade result means little; a collection shows grades across an area, revealing patterns, potential zones, and the overall tenor of mineralization, crucial for mapping targets.

Resource Modelling: Investors and geologists need a complete dataset (including lower grades and waste intervals) to build accurate resource models and understand tonnage and grade, not just headline numbers.

Avoiding Hype & Manipulation: Releasing only "cherry-picked" good results creates false impressions. A full release ensures investors see the reality, including lower-grade zones that might still be economic.

Establishing Credibility: Transparency builds trust. Showing all results, even less exciting ones, signals an honest assessment of the project

GLA

Https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/1083477/lse-reportedly-targets-wild-west-bulletin-boards-in-crackdown-on-market-abuse-1083477.html

@dgdg1

They would certainly not pay anywhere near the sums you are quoting. Please see my earlier post

@dgdg1

Not a mistake in my calculations. So lets look at Abbot and Knoll Pharmaceuticals whereby Abbot paid not the royalties or the milestone payments but rather for the full acquisition of Knoll Pharmaceuticals for the wonder drug Humira. Abbot paid $6.9 Billion 20 years ago. The drug Humira was under Phase III trials (please correct me if I am wrong) so it would be a good comparision to make for Immupharma. Someone posted that AbbVie / Abbot made $200 Billion over the 20 year period.

Assuming Abvie had forecasted to make $10 B each year for the next 20 years since acquisition of Knoll, giving rise to $200 Billion in total Revenue, I could calculate what the PV would have been 20 years ago and then work out the $6.9 payment to Knoll as a percentage of that PV. But, this would mean using various assumptions about the cost of capital used for the purposes of discounting to PV. These assumptions are unknown.

Alternatively, if you take the payment of $6.9 Billion as a percentage of the total Revenue of $200B that they have generated over the 20 year period then they paid approx 3.45% of total revenues.

(CONTINUED)......

....continued

So, the cashflows that would flow to any potential pharma co will be, assuming $10B for the Diagnostic and $10B ( 10% for the current Immunosuppressor market) for the Therapeutic side, as follows:

YEAR======CASHFLOW==========PRESENT VALUE

===0=================0===================0

===1======40,000,000,000=======31,200,341,933

===2======40,000,000,000=======24,336,533,418

===3======40,000,000,000=======18,982,704,103

===4======40,000,000,000=======14,806,671,470

===5======40,000,000,000=======11,549,330,319

===6======40,000,000,000=======9,008,576,376

===7======40,000,000,000=======7,026,766,582

===8======40,000,000,000=======5,480,938,001

===9======40,000,000,000=======4,275,178,493

===10======40,000,000,000=======3,334,675,771

===11=====40,000,000,000=======2,601,075,606

===12=====40,000,000,000=======2,028,861,208

===13=====40,000,000,000=======1,582,529,085

===14=====40,000,000,000=======1,234,386,214

===15=====40,000,000,000=======962,831,800

===16=====40,000,000,000=======751,017,034

===17=====40,000,000,000=======585,799,706

===18=====40,000,000,000=======456,928,778

===19=====40,000,000,000=======356,408,353

===20=====40,000,000,000=======278,001,562

TOTAL====800,000,000,000======140,839,555,816

( TOBE CONTINUED).....NEXT QUESTION IS WHAT WOULD A BIG PHARMA PAY IN TERMS OF ROYALTIES ON THE BASIS OF A PV OF $140,839,555,816 OVER THE 20 YEAR PERIOD. THIS IS IGNORING THE UPFRONT PAYMENT OR OTHER MILESTONE PAYMENTS

Nice one @ Alphabravo

@Umaz

Good for you. This has so much potential, its not clearly understood by a lot of people.

GLA