Member Info for rhubarbmk2

There’s good and bad here at the moment, and that is why the SP is where it is. You can’t argue with the SP. It’s only worth what the market will pay. But there’s now less “ugly”, as we have a good cash runway – 100K per month is low, very low when you’re running preclinical studies. 1M per month with no revenue – that’s a problem.

The BOD have headroom over the next year to issue 20M shares for a lab, combined with current cash reserves, so even at 10p, this is possible and doable.

Do I think they should raise at 10p? Absolutely not.

If 201 gets signed, this should signify to the market that the strategy works, and Suzy and the team have managed to “shift” a rather legacy-straddled peptide, for revenue. It’s then down to shareholders to decide if they want to sell shares, or in turn consider the new compounds and the general outlook of the Company. Is 201 absolutely nailed on? No. Was a raise at 10p good? No. Do SHs, myself included, want to be further diluted at 10p? Nope.

Do SHs want new BOD additions and perhaps a Scientific Director? I think so. Do SHs want the BOD to have more skin-in the-game with a price hurdle share option to ensure that (and this is only fair) we all have investment motivation? I think so too. Do SHs want three exciting and novel first-in-class compounds in preclinical dev to ignite some optimism and momentum over the next two years, and to drive the SP up, as we speculate which (household name) partner may come in? Better believe it.

There is a fair bit online regarding the new compound if you search. KC/MIT collaborations, in vivo data and more. In fact, arguably more work than 301 ever had at that stage, and it’s been better characterized. I’ll post some of it when it’s all been handed over, properly. I’ve lifted my “valuation” of the KC compound, in light of that. In preclinical development, for efficacy, VAL merely have to recapitulate some of the work already done. Along with a battery of safety tests (it is oncology, so they will be taking what we call an ICH S9 approach - much less arduous than, for example, a drug to treat diabetes), they will be well on their way to commercialisation. After SPV handover, Suzy will begin to market it immediately. It is also a Women’s health compound. Pharma are absolutely crying out for these, and Suzy has the wish-list of a number of potential partners. I think they’d be lining up. The FDA also have form for fast-tracking TNBC drugs. And there’s two more in trial, after that.

In summary, the last two years have been poor. I think the next two years will be good, if not transformational. I myself am willing to let the BOD have the opportunity to turn the ship, and, in order to do this, they have to spin the wheel. There’s no way now of spinning the wheel without us seeing them do it. And we have excellent transparency on our side. So we can buy, sell or hold in real time.

I will be raising the dilution issue directly with Kevin, as this is a recurring theme

"Bottle" can have two meanings, as in:

"George has bottle; he's facing the vote".

Or

"George had a bottle and didn't face the vote".

So, as twinkle toes, I'll happily bring the bottle*, my old friend!

*DISCLAIMER for CB: Childish comment acknowledgment; please don't feel the need to swan in on me.

Honestly CB; I'm the least aggressive person you'd meet. Unless repeatedly provoked.

Bit every time I've posted a retort to a fairly objectionable post, you've developed a habit of swanning in, and trying to take some form of metaphorical high ground.

You expected more, and I'm flattered by that. Nonetheless, at the end of the day, I'm just like you; a retail shareholder.

My buttons get pushed; I respond. As have you, on several occasions.

The fact is that no one is holding a gun to your head. If you don't like what you see; sell up and move on, no?

But, honestly, I've suffered a lifetime of professional moaners, with no substance. I don't run VAL. I have no obligation to toe some theoretical line of professionalism.

Suzy can't do that; I can. So suck it up, or filter me.

If I were like you, and wallowed in self pity, I'd be on your more favoured share site, telling them all that the competition is 2 years ahead, with the cleanest kinase profile I've seen; albeit in a market that's going to be more crowded than the Ganges during the Kumbh festival, but I don't get off on creating misery.

Casting the first stone has never really been my thing.

If you don't want to read what I post, filter it. If you do, then please do me the obligation of treating my post like any other.

All the best.

Honestly, my old glass-half-empty comrade; he'd only be second on my filter list, which currently stands at zero.

Maybe you should filter me (again), then I wouldn't have to darken your doorstep of sunny optimism any more!

It must be a drag, having to read all this jolly banter anyway.

George, as I think I can now safely call him, dishes it out, but he can also take it, so don't take it to heart pal. Chin-chin.

Oh and btw , despite a fairly catastrophic decline, they're still worth more than when you took your leave. :-)

Praise be to the Lord you're not, my lovely.

Yes; but you also still have your shares. Why?

And how's your head this morning, my flower?

And that midnight post, Ladies and Gentleman, should serve as an aide-memoire for our gratitude to shareholders, like RB, who booted "Valtree" from the Company.

I don't know why he keeps coming back, and asking for more. It's like a Shakespearean tragedy, without the articulation. And serves to highlight precisely why he no longer works in the industry.

Cracking post, Baloooo. Having an 18/19 year patent on a lead optimised molecule is just fab.

Porky - noted.

Are you sure that's not 15, or 8% old chap?

Only my fact checker is going off, yet again, and your statements seem to allow a 30% leeway ;-)

I’ve always personally believed that the SP of a given biotech company in the AIM represents 1: The management capability of said company; 2: The pipeline, and 3: General market conditions - in that order. The pipeline should be number one, but there’s some horrific management teams to abrogate this natural order.

Now; Suzy and the team have an open and consistent communication strategy, and they do not milk the company for their own benefit. That sets them off to a better start than many others. Suzy works incredibly hard too – for limited reward. But the 201 “deal” was, on an expectation basis, poor. Not the theoretical choice of partner, but the timing. Everything aligned in the wrong way, and we had a “swiss cheese” scenario, where, due to a number of factors, the hole went straight through. Management planning of raises and expectations was, and I’m sure by their own admission, two of the holes. But, many of the other holes were not in their gift.

As above, the SP reflects the Company in-the-round. We are at 10-13p because many holders or potential holders doubt the 201 deal, doubt the management, or both. Irrefutable IMO.

201 has issues which necessitate new patents, due to the inordinate time taken by the previous BOD. The early efficacy data was really good, I have to say (efficacy wasn’t even the primary end-point, but we had it, even with fairly strict criteria). 201 likely requires reformulation, or patent “evergreening” to use as a combination therapy etc… VAL could do this themselves, but would need to run in-house bridging work; let’s say 2 years and 2M quid, for arguments sake. They know how to do this better following their work with TX. But Suzy doesn’t think that SHs could stomach this, and I’d also tend to agree that we need to move that one on.

Paperprofits – I’ve read your posts for a while, and you’ve made some really good ones. But as has PM – excellent ones too. And from an esteemed chemist – top-shelf.

It’s a shame to fall-out, as we are (generally) batting together.

That being said, we are where we are with longer term holders, because of 201. I myself have “niggles” about it. Whilst I do not consider it a sht or bust scenario, as the new compounds, to my eye, more than cover our current market cap and we have a fresh runway to develop these well, the 201 deal is essentially the difference between a speculative “new” company with a very interesting earlier stage pipeline (301/401 to one side), and a great company with a proven track record.

I think we’ll find out over the next few weeks which it is going to be, and you have to weigh up carefully what you’ve read and learnt to choose one way. If 201 falls to the verge, there will be good opportunity to pick up cheap shares. I think though that it will still come good – it will just take longer. But, if it proceeds, there will be, if you’ve examined the new pipeline, a potential multi-year, multi-bagger, investment opportunity. All IMO DYOR et al.

Thoughts with you Gilders.

Capital "O" after a full stop, CB. And no space after the open parenthesis, if you would.

It's ironic that OB used "prostrate", as he's the one poster who has never lay with his face down, unlike some others, myself included.

I'm glad you had BPH CB, rather than something more worrying. There may yet be leverage for our decapeptide here; it's a tricky therapy area.

Iceman - feeling is mutual fella; *thumbs up*.

There - that's a very OB-esque post for me. Need to be more like him; he's a wise "old" soul, so he is.

Metom - I can’t definitively answer that, but my personal expectation is that we ought to see something material in the next 4-6 weeks. None of us can make things happen quicker, but Suzy has had plenty of boots on her neck (take it from me), and, in turn, has put her own boots to good use in my view. Obviously we have further options if this doesn’t happen (going “inside” for reassurance etc), but the BOD are absolutely convinced this is happening. I'm not inside with TX, but I have a fairly rounded judgement I feel.

In the interim, my view has definitively been not to continue hitting with a stick, as no amount of kicking Suzy is going to speed up the process. She does understand the urgency to report; she does understand that we have been let down; and she does understand the pressing need to "prove" that her strategy works. As I said the other day, it would be easy for her to walk, and that's what some did, and some still do, want to happen, but I would not support that at all at this stage, primarily because I know well enough that she's grafting as hard as she can, and she is 100% not charlatan (ref. 4D). That's why, again in my view, when we get 201 news, the scope of that announcement should go way beyond 201 itself. Because if she can shift 201 for refreshing and reformulation, she will definitely be able to shift these novel candidates, which, in and of themselves, are all potentially life changing - and - for those with an agnostic investment interest - potentially extremely lucrative.

Suzy knows that 201 needs "help" and has had a restricted field of suitors. Make no mistake - and I've grilled here; 60-100M "packages" are not on her agenda for the new compounds. You can be assured of that.

Good question Badsterman.

I've previously discussed with Suzy about being very bold with the RNSs (as others are). NOMAD sensitivities aside, these statements are actually bang on. All three of the new compounds have various existing patents to my knowledge, but VAL are now much better at patenting, and so you can guarantee that they will be fully locked and loaded, if and when they SPV transition. For some of these, there are a potential "series" of peptides as options, so the range of potential test articles is wider. I think, rather than VAL actually synthesising further peptides themselves, they'd likely strike up ongoing relationships on an individual drug or series base, and continue to work with, for example, Kings on other test articles. So yes, they would be first movers with particular technologies AND the targets.

The use of the words "cutting edge" and "novel" are certainly not to be taken lightly. The Kings platform is like nothing I've worked on in over 20 years, it's so niche. Designed by a computational chemist using AI/DL - completely next generation.

In their initial evaluations, I always assumed that VAL would be mainly running in vitro work, but this is not the case. At the stage with King's, it's likely we'll get to see in vivo tumor data, in that it could shrink them already (I hope), so we'd be, at this stage, well on the way to having a drug.

Unfortunately, and I include myself in this, we've been somewhat agnostic to all this background work, in waiting for 201. This is very unfortunate, as we've somehow gotten to a 10Mcap with three new novel preclinical projects. Take BiVictriX. Their only “real” compound is still undergoing binding assays; due later this year. Suzy would do this type of assay without really even thinking about it, to help with Mode-of-Action work, and the King's drug is way past this stage. Last time I looked, they had a MCap of about 15M; and we have three non-platform stage technologies here. Hence, why I'd always "value" each of these new ones at 10M, at the stage of SPV entry. The longer it carries on, the more value is added.

So my personal decision was to try and look beyond 201 and, although that was hard as I was fairly peeved with events, as many others, I evaluated how hard Suzy in particular was working, what she was achieving with the three compounds, plus 301 (work ongoing). I then estimated the time-lines that I would expect to be able to judge this, and decided it was fairly obvious that I shouldn't sell my shares and try to be constructive. So far, I'm very happy with that decision, and I expect that there will be a chain of announcements coming.

Ditto for me.

If you don't block me (again), strap yourself in for some more counterbalance old pal.

Good on you,

Btw; "childish".

Pot-kettle-black.

Not as worrying as my mental image of you, old sport:

Imported Chevy, in cobalt blue.

Mid-life crisis.

Wife left.

Angry.

Glad to hear it, Southern.

"Far below 6p", and I'll eat my hat, or your knickers; whichever comes to hand, my learned friend.

From what I know of the Kings tie-up, I'll happily double my stake on that SP alone.

Unfortunately for my investment, that ain't gonna happen.

It may fail in efficacy; it may fail in safety; but if it doesn't, it's worth, probably, a package of 50X our current MCap.

That's one of three shots at the target, pal,

These drops tend to happen when all your eggs are in the same basket.

They are rapidly dividing baskets at VAL, and that's the right thing to do.

DO NOT BUY SHARES BASED ON MY POSTS, and all that.

But Christ almighty, don't sell them based on Southern's. That'd would be depressingly poor.

Come on pal; you can do better than that, petal.

When I need to be pal, I will. I'm not as of this instant.