We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
In my more reckless and anarchic moments I've wondered what's to stop the AST team jamming loads of other tools and assorted junk/ex board members down the wells if the Slovenian Govt don't come up with a reasonable offer. Cutting our collective noses off to spite our faces sure, but they really shouldn't get away with what is effectively grand theft.
You’ve been shafted. As have we all :-(
One can only hope he’s kicking the can down the road in order to buy out the rest of the HH licence at fire sale prices. Obviously the flaw in that plan would be raising more cash at the current SP level...
Check out the recent BowelBabe posts on Twitter, and associated articles. Interesting reading. Would be good to know what the “fancy drugs” were!
...that there could be a chunky buy that hasn’t yet been declared.
Agreed... but they’d have to RNS something to confirm or deny knowledge of price-sensitive info, surely?
I found it under the equities "tear sheet"... along with a neat reminder that the share price has fallen 66.92% over the last 12 months!
The "analyst" isn't named, nor are the questionable substances they've obviously been ingesting. More seriously it would be useful to know what the basis of the valuation over 12 months is, and whether it is recent, as opposed to a glitch on the website that's quoting a previous valuation...
I can't actually find it... Come on, Eileen!
Don't get me wrong... I'd be stoked with 4.5p at this point!
Why don't you post a link, smarty-pants?
When the hell was that? 2010?
...and see how this plays out. Personally, I still think we are in take-over territory. Agree that interested parties could potentially wait until the lights go out before hoovering up the assets, but it's a big risk if there is more than one company, given just how low the market cap now is. Re: JB I just don't buy that he would have got involved in AST just to collect an easy salary. He has a good reputation within the industry that he wouldn't want to tarnish, and it's not as though there aren't other companies he couldn't have got involved with. He has to have a plan and a positive outcome in mind. (Colin was always a bit less reliable on this front in that he is much less tied to the O&G industry.)
Reposting a tweaked version of my post from 2019:
1) A stated value of 200m euros for the asset (once unlocked) vs a market cap of c.£3m
2) JB’s huge positivity about the licence area and reserves (without the need for stimulation) - the "best he’d seen on AIM"
3) A seismic review programme in operation – albeit nothing reported to date
4) A board change, corporate review (including expansion plans) and a cost reduction initiative announced in July 19 – but no news of substance on this front since then
5) No bids put in for the recent Croatian licence round
6) An appeal decision pending on the permits – which must be due soon
7) A strangely timed and seemingly desperate protest from the Slovenian tree-huggers association re: AST in connection with the appeal
8) A huge and as yet unexplained trade with no corresponding TR1
9) A weird Riverfort TR1 soon after that didn’t make any sense (and weeks after the fact so appearing to have been released to confuse matters further)
10) An ongoing black-out of genuine news from the board
...If this holds SAR might get a speeding ticket!
Q) What is the issue with getting IIs on board?
Mr Woodford has had a lot to answer for over the last 12 months. We meet and continue to meet with IIs. We are in the position of being a micro-cap at the moment, which is less attractive to IIs, so looking to reverse that going forward
Q) No govt funding?
We are monitoring and seeking non-dilutive funding. Currently no grants. Some early work done with govt grants but not recently.
Q) Two sources of money for our compounds are effectively blocking news and stopping us from commercialising – the US DOD and Sierra. It feels like Sierra are playing hardball and feels like things are being blocked. Are CRT interested in identifying cures of cancer? Are you getting them to leverage Sierra?
TM – We can disclose the DOD results to anyone we are in talks with under a non-DA, so it is not an obstacle.
SP – No stage payments are due at the moment.
TM – Current trials are proving successful but nothing much that can be done in terms of progressing to further trials before the end of on-going ones
Q) What is the current endgame? Nothing else in pipeline (placing no value on either Aurora and SKIL) so depends on TYK2 and 737 and waiting on 1801/1802. Do you have a plan in place?
SP – We are currently reviewing ways to take the company forward. So we need to move the TYK2 compound on to get an on-licence (presume into trials).
A new compound could be brought forward but would need to have finance that.
Q) How good is the SRI/DOD data? What would SRI percentage of any deal?
We cannot disclose the information publically. (Suggested they would have had to release news on the results of the trial if it had been very good or very bad.)
Q) Would you consider converting salary deferral to shares?
SP – we would need to look into it as it would have tax implications
Q) Are you worried about the current share price when it comes to negotiations? And/or the possibility of a low-ball take-over bid?
SP – Without a doubt. But we are looking to reverse the situation. And we also have to playing the cards we are dealt with.
Q) What voting power do we have in the CRT process? And is CRT mindful of Sareum’s cash position? Why should CRT give a damn about SAR cash position?
SP – We are very mindful of the cash position. We informed CRT 24 hours ago about the current state of play. We are trying to make sure they are moving in the direction we want to.
TM – We are a minor partner in that deal, so we have representation but no power of veto
JR – CRT work collaboratively with a lot of companies and would have trouble attracting other smaller companies if they weren’t seen to be helping the likes of Sareum. They need to maintain good relations
Q) Are you positively optimistic re: 737 in terms of data or cash?
JR – We are positive on both fronts. When you look at the data there are strong grounds for optimism (acknowledging the early stage of the trial). Scientifically there is lots to be excited about. On the commercial side we are taking a very proactive approach to the situation – eg reminding CRT that they know they have a partner in this deal.
Q) Presume you are not spending any significant money on Aurora or other compounds?
TM/JR – You can take that yes.
Q) Which will win the race – 1801 or 1802? Which is “ahead”?
JR – 1801 is ahead at present but don’t be surprised if 1802 overtakes it in due course. 1801 was the priority to begin with. We are still working on chemistry for 1802 but it has similar chemistry to 1801 and so we are not concerned.
The key difference in cancer programme vs. autoimmune. Autoimmune will have a full P1 trial in healthy people, whereas 1802 cancer can go straight to sick people
Q) In terms of R&D expenses, how much in Sterling and how much in foreign currency?
JR – The chemistry side of thing is in sterling and the toxicology in dollars
Q) End of July 2.25m in cash. Given the current burn rate and low share price, can the board provide us with some confidence that when it comes to further dilution/reassurance of value? Is consolidation being considered?
SP – This is a high priority. We are doing our best to access forms of non-dultive fundraising. Would like to avoid further dilution if possible. We are sympathetic to the idea of consolidation, but it is effectively money for lawyers and registrars – so we are not in favour of doing it by itself. If we were to attract different funding or a corporate event that would change the company then we might be interested in wrapping it up with those things.
Q) What steps have been taken to preserve cash?
The board are very mindful of the cash position – we are looking at cash reserves and cash burn at every board meeting. The board have agreed to a deferral of salaries to give them more flexibility – reducing/deferring 1/3 of total salaries
Q) Should this be put out to the markets to illustrate the commitment of the board?
No comment. (Wry smiles)
Q) It is now 8 months since you suggested that “significant value” would be achieved for Sareum within the next 12 months. How confident are you that you can achieve that in the next 4 months? Are timescales slipping?
TM – There are a number of events that could affect this. Good news from Sierra, and any progress on the other two compounds – either pre-clinical or licensing deal. We have seen some early read-out of the trials (as announced earlier this year) but have little visibility beyond what is already in the public domain.
Q) What is the current status of the TYK2 patent? And what if the US patent keeps being rejected?
JR– We have appealed the US patent ruling but the court hearing did not go in our favour, so we have “edited” and resubmitted the patent. It is an on-going process. The US argument against granting the patent is that our earlier patent essentially covers the molecules in this secondary application. Further rejection would not be positive. The good thing is that it is our patent in the way, but the downside of that is that our protection will be shorter as the original patent was filed at an earlier date. The frustrating thing is that we have no timescales or schedules – we don’t know when the patent will be reviewed. But there is another appeal available if this fails. 1802 has been taken out of the patent and this was the one causing the issues. 1801 was submitted later.
Q) How important is the patent to licensing discussions?
JR – The patent not at forefront of discussion but obviously relevant
Q) The TYK2/Lupus SRI trial finished over a year ago but there have been no updates since. What happened and is there any timescale on an announcement?
SP – The SRI collaboration with US DOD funding has been going on for some time. It was highly reliant on govt funding but the 2016/17 election put that into doubt. There was a turnover of staff and delay in funding, though the study was given an extension in terms of time. The project is now finished and the report is with the DOD. It remains confidential until they choose to make it public. We live in hope. We simply don’t know, which is very frustrating, but one of the issues in our business model. The model has its advantages but when you commission third parties to do work for you are in their hands to an extent.
Apologies for any bits I've garbled (and I've combined some questions too):
Q) Have any directors met with Nick Glover and were milestones discussed? No other sense of timescales? Today’s announcement sounded less optimistic than previously.
SP – The conclusion we drew from our meeting was in today’s announcement. I believe there is every chance of attracting further milestones – but timing is the issue.
Sierra has made their position very clear now, and on that basis we cannot be sure who would ultimately pay those milestones (eg if they on-licence to another company). The licensing agreement is between CRT and Sierra. We don’t have a seat at the table to negotiations (past or future), but we are having very active communications with CRT to give us the very best info we can work with
Q) How long do you think Sierra have to procrastinate with regard to the asset before team at CRT start to talk about taking it back and looking for partners? What is your sense?
SP – I will give you a very hedged answer. The trial is still ongoing and no new patients have been on, so we will only know the results once the last patient is out of the trial. The better the drug the longer the survival and therefore the longer the trial. Knowing precise timescales is very tricky but it looks like H1 or possibly Q1. Once the trials are completed, the data would need to be reported on and it would be surprising if CRT could force the return of the licence before that point. Sierra may return before then but that is hard to know. We are probably talking about Q3–Q4 for the final report but that is a guesstimate.
I haven't got my arse in gear and sorted my letter of representation. Also resent being charged £25 for the privilege. Do you reckon they'd still let me in the door?
Something is definitely going on... What is your alternative take on last week’s huge trade? And don’t tell me it’s someone naked shorting!
And I wouldn’t want to hazard a guess at a price but I suspect it will be less than we want and much less than the perceived value of the asset and most likely less than the money invested to date. I suspect 1.4p might be on the higher side even though it would present fair value to the buyer and a reasonable mark-up on today’s price.