Member Info for SocialistB

Part 1.

Ai calculations based on my memory of how things went down over the last 5 years.

If you disagree with the numbers, feel free to change them.

## Why a 2020‑high buyer could still walk away with a profit

If you bought Hemogenyx at its 2020 peak of **15 p (£0.15)** and never touched the position, the subsequent changes to the company’s share structure actually *reduce* the price you need to break even, let alone achieve a 3× or 10× return.

### What happened to the share pool

1. **Tripling of total shares** – the company issued enough new stock that the total number of shares became **3 ×** the original amount.

2. **400 : 1 reverse split** – every 400 old shares were combined into 1 new share, dividing the share count by 400.

3. **“More than double” increase** – after the split the company issued additional shares, ending with roughly **6 million** shares outstanding (≈ 2 × the post‑split count).

These steps change the *percentage* of the company you own, even though the absolute number of shares in your pocket stays the same.

### The dilution factor

Let

- \(S_0\) = original total shares (at the 2020 high)

- \(S_f\) = final total shares after the three actions

\[

\begin{aligned}

\text{After tripling:}&\;3S_0 \\

\text{After 400:1 split:}&\;\frac{3S_0}{400} \\

\text{After “more‑than‑double”:}&\;2\!\times\!\frac{3S_0}{400}

=\frac{6S_0}{400}

=\frac{S_0}{66.\overline{6}}

\end{aligned}

\]

So the **final share pool is about 1/66.7 of the original pool**.

The **dilution factor** (how many times larger the original pool was) is therefore **≈ 66.7**.

### How the price targets are derived

If you paid \(P_{\text{buy}} = £0.15\) per share, the price you need for your unchanged share count to be worth the original investment is:

\[

\boxed{P_{\text{break‑even}} = P_{\text{buy}} \times \text{Dilution factor}}

\]

Plugging the numbers:

\[

P_{\text{break‑even}} = 0.15 \times 66.7 \approx £10.0

\]

From there:

\[

\begin{aligned}

P_{3\times} &= 3 \times P_{\text{break‑even}} \approx £30.0 \\

P_{10\times}&=10 \times P_{\text{break‑even}} \approx £100.0

\end{aligned}

\]

### What this means for a 2020‑high investor

- **Break‑even**: the stock only needs to climb to **≈ £10** per share.

- **Triple the money**: a price of **≈ £30** per share would give a 3× return.

- **Ten‑fold the money**: a price of **≈ £100** per share would deliver a 10× return.

All of this assumes the three share‑count changes you described are correct. If the actual numbers differ, you can simply replace the dilution factor in the formula.

### Quick “plug‑in” calculator

1. **Enter your purchase price** (\(P_{\text{buy}}\)).

2. **Enter the total‑share multiplier** (original shares ÷ final shares).

3. Compute:

\[

P_{\text{break‑even}} = P_{\text{buy}}

Got a bit bored so asked a question to an Ai, here is part of the answer:

The global AML treatment market was estimated at ~USD 3.47 billion in 2024 and is forecast to grow strongly, with immunotherapies and CAR‑T approaches identified as high‑value segments because rrAML has substantial unmet need and high willingness to pay for transformative therapies. That market backdrop is why big pharma pays premiums for differentiated CAR‑T assets addressing rrAML.

How a big pharma would value HG‑CT‑1 today

Big pharma valuation of an early clinical CAR‑T typically blends: upfront cash, milestone payments, and royalty or profit‑share. Key inputs here are: probability of technical/clinical success (low‑mid in Phase I), market size for rrAML, manufacturing/scale advantages, and competitive landscape.

- Base case (conservative): If the asset is still Phase I with only 3 patients and limited durability data, an acquirer would likely offer USD 300–500M total deal value (e.g., USD 50–150M upfront + staged milestones) reflecting high risk but high upside.

- Optimistic case (positive Phase II signals / orphan/fast‑track): If subsequent cohorts show durable complete remissions and the program secures orphan/fast‑track designations, the price can move to USD 700M–1.5B+, especially if the acquirer sees a clear path to approval and scalable manufacturing.

- Premium scenarios: If HG‑CT‑1 demonstrates best‑in‑class efficacy or a clear manufacturing cost/time advantage, strategic buyers may pay multi‑billion valuations, but that requires late‑stage data and commercial proof points.

I wonder about the outcome of the current talks.

Maybe we are better of just raising enough cash to get patients 4 and 5 through

1, which is a child.

Maybe that will drive the price upwards.

In other words no reason to be disheartened if no deals manifest itself before Christmas.

There might be a value increase in waiting.

17th of December is Wednesday next week and also exactly 3 months since we had the amazing news regarding Patient 3, you see below:

"Importantly, early indications of clinical efficacy have been observed. Preliminary assessment shows that original AML cells were not detectable in the patient using standard testing methods."

Mr Sandler has since then stated that he is conversations with multiple pharmaceutical companies.

I think it is fair to assume that if no big pharmaceutical companies had been in touch with him before, despite Patient 1 doing so well at that stage, then they will have been shortly after the 17th of September, if not on that very day itself.

Mr Sandler and the BOD, have given a clear roadmap for the next couple of years, how to progress HG-CT-1 and the funding needed.

It's all out there for big pharma to see.

Who are going to be the first meet the needs and show willingness to go beyond and at the same time offer good terms and conditions?

But maybe that is not the real question.

Maybe the real question is, who are going to follow up with an even better offer.

Recently we have seen that after Netflix made a bid for Warner Bros, then Paramount followed up shortly after with an even better offer.

There could very very well be an interesting week or 2 ahead of us:-)

@SNewby

Thank you for your reply.

If your holding is too big for your liking, as you, in a moment of “madness “when the shares were dirt cheap, have taken on more risk than you like, I hope you have managed to offload some shares while you have been in profit, or will be able to in the next couple of weeks.

Caution is a good thing; you might very well make it out of this share better than I, by selling at an earlier stage than I dream of doing myself.

Having said that, I must admit I do not quite understand your position, given that you have been here a long time and have gone through the ups and downs.

Hemogenyx is in the best position it has ever been in.

The company has always had to raise money.

But the data it now has behind it, first happened this year (Human trials)

I’ll argue two things.

1st: Even if it does not cure Patients (which I hope very much it does), then the results are still outstanding.

From my layman point of view, even the lowest dose should be considered instead of chemotherapy from now on and then followed up with Haematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (HSCT) if it does not cure the cancer.

I hope and believe it will be based on the RNS I have read, but I could be wrong, or it might not yield the optimal outcome in every case. If HSCT are then needed, great, the option is there, and maybe one day CDX can do that job (but that is a long way off)

2nd: Prevention of relapse. So far, so good with Patient 1.

5-year data on that cannot be expected until 2030 for obvious reasons, and depending on the Patient's age and health at the time of injection, it might not be realistic to expect at all.

Had there been a relapse at this stage, I would expect it to have been announced in an RNS, as it seems to be price-sensitive information.

And I am sure that it would be mentioned to anyone under an NDA, as they have a serious interest in engaging with HG-CT-1 in one way or another.

If information like that was withheld, it would amount to a severe breach of trust in my view.

I am certain Hemogenyx is not walking down that road.

To me, this is the best lottery ticket in town.

Hence why I keep buying when I can.

@SNewby

Three questions for you.

1. What is your point with the post that started this thread?

2. Which bet have you made? That HEMOGENYX will succeed or fail?

3. Have you made a bet at all?

I agree that everything is not set in stone here yet.

I am also of the opinion that, those individuals who wants things set in stone, should go for dividend paying stocks.

Ie, companies with a revenue stream.

HEMOGENYX is neither.

It is a speculative share.

Either the product works or it does not.

And it is also a question of can the company raise the funds needed or not.

Is it too high risk.

For me, NO.

I not just like the clinical information we have been given through the RNS'

I LOVE IT.

I also strongly believe, based on history that the BOD can raise multi many millions in a year.

They have proven that in the past.

And now they have evidence, not just from mice models, but from human trials.

We know it works for weeks.

We know it works for months.

Hopefully we will soon (1st quarter of 2026) be told that it works for a year.

I am sure you like do many others wish nothing but the best for Patient 1.

So where do you stay currently?

To high risk for you to take a chance on this share with your own money?

@one4one

You said:

"Until hemo tech is proven then further placings !"

And so what, if I may ask?

HEMOGENYX needs money.

No discussions about that.

The CEO has clearly stated what amount he expects is needed over the next couple of years.

But the funds can come from other sources then placings.

Grants

Income from Estonia

Upfront money in a JV

Upfront money in a licence deal

An outright sale of HG-CT-1.

The point is everybody now knows the amount required to bring HG-CT-1 forward.

That is good for all.

Wether you're an old investors or a new one, even if you are only contemplating investing.

Personally, I think it will be a walk in the park for HEMOGENYX to secure that sum in 2026, they have secured sums in that region in the past, if I am not remembering wrong.

And that was at a time where they had less data then they do now.

So, I see no problem securing the funds in 2026.

My hope is it is done gradually on a monthly or quarterly basis into an ever increasing share price to minimize the dilution.

Rather that then do it all in one go this year.

From the RNS' released on 17th of September 2025:

"Importantly, early indications of clinical efficacy have been observed. Preliminary assessment shows that original AML cells were not detectable in the patient using standard testing methods. "

For me, as a layman this is absolutely a potato's/potato situation.

To me it means the same as what I stated previously.

I might be wrong, please educate me.

Cancer cells not detectable, I absolutely love it.

And if it has happened once, it can happen again.

Like it or load it.

But the current stats are 33 percent.

As more and and more are being treated in the future, it might even go up.

Or at the very least, HEMOGENYX will gather further data showing whom has a high success rate and whom does not.

But currently, with the data available it stands at 33 percent.

FACT

Full clearance of cancer cell after just 28 days, has happened once, hence it it is likely to happen again.

I am sure that is the message from Mr Sandler to potential buyers/partners regarding HG-CT-1.

I'd even go so far and say, that it is most likely also what is on the mind of potential buyers/partners out there considering the potential of HG-CT-1.

The current stats is 33 percent chance.

Or 1 in 3, as that is what has currently been achieved.

Onwards and upwards

@Aldebaran.

Thank you for providing that number, glad to see I didn't remember completely wrong:-)

Assuming the number is correct and that all warrants are excersized then HEMOGENYX are likely to have 6.237.878 shares in issue at some point in the future.

(Friday 28-11-25 RNS: 5,917,878 shares + 320,000)

There might be further dilution in the future, there might not be.

But for now, lets work with the number: 6.237.878

If HEMOGENYX sells HG-CT-1, license it or makes a JV, then that deal has a value, it brings some money to the coffer of HEMOGENYX, which should increase the intrinsic value of each share.

For arguments sake, let's say a deal brings in 62.378.780 pounds, then that equals 10 quid a share.

If it only brings in half that amount, well then it's only 5 quid a share in intrinsic value.

On the other hand if it brings in 623.787.800 millions then it is 100 quid in intrinsic value per share.

I do not know what deal HEMOGENYX are going to make, not do I know the sum they'll accept.

You put your own number what you think is likely each deal will bring to the table (outright sale, License, JV) into the equation and decide with 6.237.878 shares and you have your own intrinsic value.

Question is, if there is a lot of money being paid for HG-CT-1, way more then anticipated that it will cost to bring CDX and CBR to market, will there be a special dividend payed out?

If HEMOGENYX was to be paid in excess of 600 million for HG-CT-1, I would not be adverse to a special dividend of a 10er per share.

Just saying:-)

Do anyone know the exact number of outstanding warrants, as it stands at the moment.

From memory, I seem to recall someone suggesting somewhere in the 300000 region.

Makes me wonder why.

Have some people been banned from posting on this board?

Or, has the SHORTS been closed or so significantly reduced that it is reasonable to believe there was a motivation behind posting doom and gloom?

Is there anyone with access to the SHORT position that can update us?

Last week's RNS announced that: “the total issued share capital of the Company as at 28 November 2025 consists of 5,917,878 ordinary shares”

On top of this, we know there are still outstanding warrants.

Still, I see this as housekeeping, preparing for the month of December.

I have high hopes for the next couple of days, weeks.

We know that Patient 3 showed no sign of cancer according to standard measuring methods after 28 days.

I think it is fair to assume that in a case like that, you can already see the writing on the wall earlier.

Maybe not after 1 week.

But I am sure that by week 2 or 3 (21 days), there is a clear indication of where it is heading.

This is the season of imagination.

Imagine being able to inject a Patient in the next couple of days or weeks, in time well enough to bring a Patient and their family good news before Christmas day.

Now that would be awesome.

Who would not like to bring such a present to people?

For that reason, I believe everyone involved has given it their all over the last couple of weeks to ensure this happens.

Watch this space, things could happen sooner than we think.

@HedgeHogarth

I hope you do make a submission to the RCA.

Unfortunately, I have to say, don't be surprised if nothing comes if it.

It's just the way the court system is put together.

It's difficult to prosecute people.

Unfortunately it means, crimes pay.

May I suggest you present it in such a way, that it is obvious that there is a correlation, (which it sounds like is exactly what you intent to do)

When you get the refusal, look into a judicial review or present it to the press or politicians.

That is the only way to have a chance of progress and success.

With that in mind, maybe skip the politians:-)

I uploaded the post below earlier today.

I think it should be printet again, as a counteract measure.

"@Lostapound

The Ai bot you used, is it by any chance called:

"AldebaranNotPosting" Ai shareprice prediction bot?

Or something similar?

Try and ask it about the dangers of investing in this company at this stage.

And if existing shareholders should sell.

And if it is a yes, whom they should be selling it to?

Its some answers I'd very much like to hear from that Ai bot."

@Lostapound

The Ai bot you used, is it by any chance called:

"AldebaranNotPosting" Ai shareprice prediction bot?

Or something similar?

Try and ask it about the dangers of investing in this company at this stage.

And if existing shareholders should sell.

And if it is a yes, whom they should be selling it to?

Its some answers I'd very much like to hear from that Ai bot.

@Alderaran

You said: " delayed the trial by starting tech transfer when supposedly in talks with farmer. I think that is a huge mistake"

I'll argue that with 1 patient out of 3, cancer free according to conventional testing methods equals at least 33 percent success rate.

On top of that Patient 1 has not been declared dead via an RNS, so fair to assume alive and doing well (hopefully, who would claim and thereby inference they wish otherwise)

That is a huge success rste in my layman eyes.

For that reason I assume he is in serious talk and will take seriously any serious talks with big pharma.

The transfer has happen at some point, and at point it will cause delay.

So might as well do it now.

Having it sorted, can only increase the value in the case of a right out sale of HG-CT-1.

For me, the writing is on the wall.

I might have misread the situation.

Then that's on me.

You gotta have a risk appetite to be in a non cash generating company.

I feel safe though because of the science.

People who find it to risky, should simply stay away at this stage, maybe forever.

I cast my vote for .......ta dah (drum roll)

Mr Vladislav Sandler

@Notposting

Friday I asked the following question to you and Aldebaren.

He has given an answer.

"It's my understanding that you see the potential for failure ahead, that the company might go bankrupt.

Or is it just the risk of dilution that you fear.

Is it one of them or is it both that you see as realistic outcomes?"

@Hulver

I agree with your first sentence that such an approach would be a stepping stone to achieve a higher price.

But how high a percentage are we going to, or willing to give away for say 20-30 million?

I'd prefer a maximum of 10 percent equity in HG-CT-1.

Or all the money back to the investor + 10 percent interest per started year, first to be repaid on sale of HG-CT-1, or alternatively from income, from the product in Estonia, however repayment cannot exceed income.

But then it starts becoming complicated.

10 percent stake is easier and potentially much more profitable for the investor.

You said: "At the same time there would be income from Estonia that would be Hemo's income stream to fund other working capital and progressing CBR"

I had not given that option any thought whatsoever.

I think that is a brilliant idea.

But again, just to be on the safe side, if we sold a stake in HG-CT-1, I still think a portion of the money we should insist on being able to spend as we please, as income from Estonia is what we wish for, but it is not a given.

Delay or something not going to plan is always a risk.

So best to be covered from all possible angles.

@Hulver

Interesting suggestion.

And a possibility.

And so is the suggestion by Saint68 as well.

If it was your suggestion that was to go ahead, then I would have one request, that HEMOGENYX have the right to spend the money as they please.

Or at least over a significant amount.

It would be great that we can advance our other products in tandem.

These are the term and conditions a partner should be willing to accept.

But obviously with the caveat that plenty is spent on their investment.

To keep it clear and separate.

X millions goes to HEMOGENYX to do with as they please.

XX millions goes to the development of HG-CT-1.

All in all, it adds up to multi many millions to HEMOGENYX.

The more millions, the higher a cut of HG-CT-1 is given away.

Sounds fair to both parties, if you ask me.