PYX Resources: Achieving volume and diversification milestones. Watch the video here.
Snaffleman, unfortunately I don't have an answer to your question other than I totally agree with your sentiments. The Nasdaq listing was a debacle and, as yet, no clue why it appeared to go so badly. A couple of observations:
- the current CFO, although interim, joined after the listing so is not to blame
- was it pressure from the US IIs - Sand Grove & BofA? Lots of speculation about the relationship, if any, between the pair but no real explanation.
- was it pressure from UK Its on the basis that if you're targeting the US market then you need a US listing?
- Nasdaq is flooded with US biotechs so difficult to raise profile - no excuse imo
- point that has been made on this board a number of times is that big pharma is not interested as Iclaprim is a short term, hopefully one-off treatment. Understandably they prefer investing in life-time drugs e.g. statins
- worth bearing in mind that a number of AIM listed biotechs have gone down the dual listing route and have seen no real benefit other than extra cost e.g. SUMM & MTPH
With regards to your once bitten position, despite the very attractive sp and imminent FDA decision it is still a risk. I would also suggest that if the sp doesn't start moving north in January then the risk is increasing. No matter how tight any negotiations are between MTFB and potential partner/s there will inevitably be leakage resulting in sp reaction. If
Thanks Ivy. No worries though as I fully recognise the need for and value of patience with MTFB. Despite the share price slump as we move towards February's FDA decision, I still have total confidence in the BoD so much so that I took advantage of the low price to add a further chunk to my holding last week.
I don't post much and when I do it's because I've found something particularly irritating or interesting about a post/s. I haven't had a problem with the recent arrival of the de-ramping crew as I'm a great believer in the freedom of speech on these boards as long as views are based on well researched facts. When the integrity of individuals is questioned, particularly when a poster is unlikely to have met the individual/s they are targeting, then I have a major issue. GL and the MTFB board have come in for a lot of unnecessary negativity recently as indeed you have on a couple of occasions. Spoils a good board for me.
The above may appear a tad self-righteous but meeting as many board members before and during an investment cycle is, for me, a vital part of my research. GL has been picked on for not being 'charismatic' whatever that means. One thing's for sure, I'd rather have some serious, dedicated, thoroughly professional individual looking after my money than a loud, back slapping, beer swilling joker of which there are too many in AIM companies (latter description slightly exaggerated but I'm sure you get the point!!).
Another key point about the MTFB BoD is the benefit of complementary skills on a team and it is teamwork rather than individual charismatic brilliance that generally leads to success. GL, JG and DH represent such a team. JG, the interim CFO, has also come in for negative commentary. I had a lengthy 1on1 with him at the last AGM (couldn't get a word with GL as you'd collared him!!) and it was well worthwhile. His contact within the Wall St investment community is exemplary. The spread of skills and contacts between the three of them is excellent and one of the reasons why MTFB has managed to get Iclaprim through to an FDA decision is because of this.
Anybody with any doubts about the BoD do check their CVs on the MTFB website but just as a starter. Then use that information to do some further digging. I'm confident you will be surprised/pleased at what you learn.
Ian B - spot on!
Perhaps it's time for a few of the malcontents on this board to follow the good example of the BoD, as suggested in the last couple of lines of your post, 'all the talking to get it here has been done, so now they wait and stay quiet a few more weeks and rightly so imo.'
Despite the increasing criticism of the BoD, and GL in particular, they have, imo, done an excellent job in bringing Iclaprim through to the point of approval. Furthermore, anyone with even the vaguest knowledge of negotiations should appreciate that you don't publicise progress until the paper is signed - even to satisfy a few disgruntled PIs!!
Many thanks Parob. You do a brilliant job updating and collating the information on Opti's business streams. Presented like this makes it so easy to appreciate the great progress that is being made.
According to the ClinicalTrials.gov website the estimated completion date for the trial entitled 'Harvest of CTCs From MBC Patients Using the Parsortix™ PC1 System' is 31st March 2019. I'm unfamiliar with the process that then follows for medical device approval. For drugs an NDA is then required which takes 6 months followed by an FDA assessment which takes a further 3 months before approval/rejection advised.
There must be the equivalent of an NDA for medical devices. Does anybody know what that is and timescales for such an exercise? With that information it should possible to be more specific about an FDA approval date and then check back with Angle. Still a tad vague for me!
Jolli, you can forget the conspiracy theory!!
A perfectly straightforward explanation in that a broker's letter was issued today to all shareholders (unfortunately I still have a small holding!) covering the appointment of a new nomad and what would happen if one wasn't found by the 1st Feb 2019. Key extract from my letter dated today, 'If a replacement Nominated Adviser has not been appointed by 1 February 2019 then it is expected that trading in the Company’s Shares will be suspended on that date.'
Well said Ivy!
Today's ST Business section has an interview with Kasim Kutay, CEO of Novo Holdings, the fund that manages the investments for the Novo Nordisk Foundation. Assets amount to £46.2b.
In the body of the interview he talks about the critical shortage of new antibiotics and the number of big pharmas that have closed R&D programmes. However, Novo has launched a fund of £165m to invest in early stage companies developing ABs because of this desperate shortage of new drugs.
Whilst it won't be plain sailing it does highlight yet again the opportunity for MTFB and Iclaprim.
I'd post a link but I'm old school enough to enjoy dipping in and out of the paper during the week!!
Ivy, one thought that supports your view that MTFB won't be going it alone which, by the way, I agree with. If they planned to or were in the process of setting up their own sales team then they would need to appoint a head of sales, at the very minimum VP level. Given timescales that should have already happened. However, an appointment of that level in a company this size would have prompted an RNS of some description. Nothing!
Thanks FLT and Ivy for posting the links. Both new to me and very interesting. The one following Ivy's link, 12th June, talks a lot towards the end about the increasing problems with Vancomycin and how dosage is having to be increased to be effective. Not clear whether that's down to resistance to SoC norm or an effort by hospitals to speed recovery and move patients through faster. Either way it surely increases the peripheral risks and, as a consequence, plays to the strengths of Iclaprim
Sheltie, many thanks. I'm not a particular active poster as you can see by the small number against my name and restrict myself to those boards that only have posters making considered, facts based contributions. Certainly the case here led very effectively by Mr Ivy.
Too many of my other AIM biotechs have boards infested with malicious, spiteful and extremely ignorant rampers/de-rampers completely disinterested in considering another viewpoint. Can't be doing with it. I've been out of circulation for a few days and catching up here see a major increase in posts but thankfully still quality and the ramping, so far, is minimal and readily countered! Long may it last!
Risky, an excellent, balanced and well thought through post. Completely agree with your review
Felko, suggest you concentrate on the US if interested in MTFB's marketing efforts. Whilst listed on AIM, it is essentially a US company with a nasdaq listing, head office in NY and a BoD virtually all American (GL, a Brit, is domiciled in the US. The only one I'm not certain of is Chairman Richard Morgan also a Brit but who spends bulk of his time flitting between US and UK).
As you will know, number of commercial options under consideration but focus appears to be very much on the US market and a commercial partnership providing MTFB with ready made access to hospitals across the US. Faster and cheaper than doing it themselves. I'm sure that, despite your concerns, the management team don't spend all day in Wall Street bars sipping martinis! That's for next year after approval and commercialisation! Another way of me agreeing with The Italian's point!
Any concerns I might have are encapsulated by the mystifying sp activity or lack of it. Why has it not made better progress of late given the stage Iclaprim is now at? Perhaps Hanibal has a very valid point which could explain a lot.
Sheltie, all options have been mentioned at various times including the last AGM but no specific timescales. They appear to be separating the US from the rest of the world and concentrating currently on the US but considering options for both. If they go down the partnership route for the US then I would think an agreement would be in place prior to the FDA decision, Q1 2019, such that they can get the sales show on the road without any delay.
ST, no problem with your sentiments in general but your choice of words, 'like the other cowboy CEOs may be our CEO', your inference being that GL is a cowboy. I've met him on a number of occasions including 1to1 discussions and I can assure you he is no cowboy. My opinion is one I'm sure will be shared by other posters on this board many of whom know him a lot better than I do.
Anything said about commercialisation, including Ian B's link below, has been in broad general terms with little more detail other than possible options. I don't think you can expect more at this juncture as it could well result in MTFB's negotiating position being undermined. I'm sure you agree the closer that MTFB's negotiating cards are held to the corporate chest the better the potential outcome. Yes, more detail might boost the share price but surely only in the short term before we drift back to were we've been for an extended period.
Like every LTH, I would have liked to have seen a stronger sp performance particularly given the positive news - P3, NDA etc. However, FDA approval, if forthcoming, is less than 4 months away and, in the meantime, there may well be commercial announcement/s that have a positive effect. We're nearly over the line!!
You might like to re-phrase your post, GL is no cowboy!!
Thanks for posting. An excellent and very worthwhile read. Certainly increases confidence in FDA approval of Iclaprim.
Afternoon Ivy. Many thanks for posting the Zacks report. A compelling analysis well qualified and quantified. Certainly helps to allay any concerns I may have about future commercial prospects particularly as the target $28 per share is based only on treatment for ABSSSI.
Ivy/Jackdaw, thanks for your responses last night and this morning both of which were helpful.
Any new drug treatment being progressed through development, trials and approval is like playing with a monster jigsaw - difficult to piece together. Situation exacerbated when developer is an AIM sized biotech and further still when, as PIs, we don't have all the pieces!! We've got most of the pieces now, or so we think, and puzzle nearly complete. Very much a case of patience for a further 6 months although despite reassurances I'm still concerned about market penetration following approval and commercial deal.