Member Info for stu485

JFH,

No we don’t all know what’s coming , how do you !?

@ Andrew.

-We know the market has reacted negatively to today’s RNS.

-We know “further funding will be sought by the Company prior to the commencement of the Phase I clinical trials”

Further than that , it’s all hope and opinion and not the “ sure thing” you’re again trying to convince all, it is.

I think it might be a while before you kick off your Clarks and slip on D&G’s like Simon’s, but good luck anyway.

AIMO

JFH,

Maybe many will wait until the funding question has been answered and enter/re-enter once known .

Probably nothing at all to do with trying to time FDA clearance.

As for your “sure thing” regarding actual FDA clearance.

Would you put a percentage on that , maybe 95% as you did on initial submission clearing without a hold !?

Your “sure thing” predictions have a history of not being so and unfortunately for you, that’s an indisputable fact !

AIMO

JFH,

I would be concerned were that not the case. @Andrew.

I note neither you or HH have made any comment on the subject matter of most note to what i would expect the majority on here;

Why no estimated timelines to resubmission within today’s RNS ?

AIMO

HH,

You should be careful making personal accusations on this forum against me and others, you could be reported for such activity .

Please refrain and stick to fair and reasonable debate of the facts .

Thank you.

@ Andrew !

JFH,

I’ve noticed (and others) , you continue to avoid the factual content within my and others posts and instead choose to distract from the subject matter to personal attack.

I wonder why !!

Micky,

It’s a fair question.

To answer properly i believe you have to reconsider the Prevail investment.

The company said at the time and i paraphrase, the Prevail investment will be used to pay Prevail for some of the PLANNED phase 1 works.

My understanding is it’s nothing more than a loan.

The SP paid inconsequential , only the value of relevance .

There’s nothing within any RNS I’ve read where it states further non diluting funding is now available as a consequence of the Prevail funds obtained.

AIMO

Micky,

Unfortunately the company has decided not to share the estimated timeline for the remaining works they’ve announced is now required prior to resubmission.

The first question to ask yourself to try and estimate the remaining timeline is, why would the company not offer an estimate to resubmissions were it a short and simple process as the ramp gang would have you believe?

The second question to ask is why make the announcement at all ?

Were i about to raise funds to support further end to end testing and resubmission, i’d let the market now of some progress first !

Well done Simon !

Ps.

No JFH your argument of non disclosure of timelines to prevent trading is BS and is not how companies operate and only useful to suite your argument.

AIMO

When the company statement of, further funding being required before phase 1 clinical , is raised some here get extremely defensive and employ pathetic distraction tactics…Why !?

Were there no concern would they act the same , I wonder!

AIMO

JFH,

That must be the most obvious avoidance of a factual post I’ve seen of yours.

Clearly you don’t want to engage with it as you don’t want to consider, or indeed others to consider the company statement regarding funding.

Please try harder to disguise your transparent agenda.

AIMO

It seems many on here believe if/when FDA clears H Car-T , present investors are home safe.

Well if you ignore the company statement “further funding will be sought PRIOR to the commencement of phase 1 clinical trials”, you could be correct.

You could also be correct if the funding is none diluting.

The point being, we don’t know how the funding will be structured but we do know , It’s coming before year end !*

Ps.

Mr I, it is not guaranteed H Car-T will be cleared this month, this year or ever . So please stop intimating it is!

* On the assumption phase1 Clinical trial commence 23 as implied.

AIMO

JFH,

You’re wrong…again 😉

I have no intention of trading and to believe any posts on here could influence the SP , i think silly.

I’ve mentioned that Hemo’s path may actually prove to be the best !

Obviously, daring to highlight other competing solutions is a crime against humanity…in your world!

AIMO

JFH,

…or the board could debate the pro’s & cons of the competing science and solutions .

I thought that was a big reason for the board to even exist?

Why do you get so defensive and abusive when a single post might not suit your agenda!?

AIMO

JFH,

Tricky isn’t it !

You and others might now actually go try and understand the science rather than keep regurgitating how you trust it’s brilliance, with no real understanding of it or other competing possible solutions.

I’ll help you out .

Hemo’ are developing a more conventional approach so you never know, it could prove the better path to take ,even though scientifically less advanced.

AIMO

JFH,

Their Car-T for AML is to be fair, only a small part of their pipeline .

There was no increase in SP as a lead up to IND approval, FACT !

They did have a boost when Pfizer invested 25m$ , but short lived as PLACING soon after, was catalyst for big SP drop.

I see you’re not keen to discuss the differences in the science as my point 1…understandably!

AIMO

Chaps,

Allogeneic with 5 Genome edits, Car-T for AML , IND approved.

Two , takeaway’s.

1. Has the science moved on and possibly leaving others behind with outdated potential solutions?

2. Their Car-T IND approval resulted in a slight drop in SP !

https://investor.cariboubio.com/node/8216/pdf

AIMO

Mr I,

You’ve repeatedly asked the question , why would you sell near IND clearance.

I’ve given you an answer , one of a possible many.

I doubt you even took the time to read Hemo’s RNS words, and instead claim to trust something which you clearly don’t understand…the science!

AIMO

Goodbye…again.

Mr I,

Maybe it’s because IND clearance is close ! Sounds counter intuitive doesn’t it .

What happens straight after and what does the Hemogenyx Half Year RNS extract state below ?

“Substantial funding will be required by the Company during the clinical trial phase and further funding will be sought by the Company prior to the commencement of the Phase I clinical trials.

The Company cannot be certain that such additional funding will be available on acceptable terms, or at all. To the extent that the Company raises additional funds by issuing equity securities, the Company's stockholders may experience dilution.”

Couldn’t resist having a look at recent posts and see , …same old .

AIMO

GLA

This is not speculation!

The recent ramping of non evidential company progress in an attempt to DISTRACT from the principal concern to shareholders, written large within the recent RNS, is disgraceful and deceitful! 



The above combined with continued bullying of 121 just because he dares offer an alternate opinion, has prompted this final and very reluctant post .

Cyrox, is correct to state, all the recent hype is speculative. 

Cyrox is also correct that there COULD be progress on a product within the year, sufficient to prompt an SP lift. 



However, CBR is not even patent approved & 
H Car-T is on FDA clinical hold…FACTS !

So let’s not speculate for a moment. 



Let’s leave the , if, could, maybe , expect, potential, debate and consider a factual one !… WILL !

“

FURTHER FUNDING WILL BE SOUGHT PRIOR TO PH1”

The above statement of fact, made AFTER the Prevail fund announcement.

Read the RNS excerpt copied below.


I’d suggest dilution is the biggest concern & risk to current shareholders.

Dilution may come in many guises. 



Spinning off a potential asset at little or no value to current shareholders being one such and guess what, the company mention the same below and JFH appears to be laying the groundwork of expectation…how does he know that and would the FCA be interested in this early knowledge !? 



Someone mentioned it’s best for me to leave this board as I’m swimming against the tide. That tide being a foul tide (Tilly will understand) a foul tide of ramping and deliberate deception expressed by many on here, to ensnare the unsuspecting,…please be aware! 



The worst of luck to the gang, the best of luck to genuine others and the company.



Goodbye. 



Ps Stop bullying 121, he has some good insight.

AIMO 



RNS



“Substantial funding will be required by the Company during the clinical trial phase and further funding will be sought by the Company prior to the commencement of the Phase I clinical trials. 

The Company cannot be certain that such additional funding will be available on acceptable terms, or at all. To the extent that the Company raises additional funds by issuing equity securities, the Company's stockholders may experience dilution. Any debt financing, if available, may involve restrictive covenants. If the Company is unable to raise additional capital when required or on acceptable terms, it may have to (i) significantly delay, scale back or discontinue the development and/or commercialisation of one or more product candidates; (ii) seek collaborators for product candidates at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable and on terms that are less favourable than might otherwise be available; or (iii) relinquish or otherwise dispose of rights to technologies, product candidates or products that it would otherwise seek to develop or commercialise on unfavourable terms.”

The recent ramping of non evidential company progress in an attempt to DISTRACT from the principal concern to shareholders, written large within the recent RNS, is disgraceful and deceitful!

The above combined with continued bullying of 121 just because he dares offer an alternate opinion, has prompted this final and very reluctant post .

Cyrox, is correct to state, all the recent hype is speculative.

Cyrox is also correct that there COULD be progress on a product within the year, sufficient to prompt an SP lift.

However, CBR is not even patent approved &

H Car-T is on FDA clinical hold. FACTS !

So let’s not speculate for a moment.

Let’s leave the , if, could, maybe , expect, potential, debate and consider a factual one !… WILL !

FURTHER FUNDING WILL BE SOUGHT PRIOR TO PH1

Read the RNS excerpt copied below.

I’d suggest dilution is the biggest concern & risk to current shareholders. Dilution may come in many guises.

Spinning off a potential asset at little or no value to current shareholders being one such and guess what, the company mention the same below and JFH appears to be laying the groundwork of expectation…how does he know that and would the FCA be interested in this early knowledge !?

Someone mentioned it’s best for me to leave this board as I’m swimming against the tide. That tide being a foul tide (Tilly will understand) a foul tide of ramping and deliberate deception expressed by many on here, to ensnare the unsuspecting, please be aware!

The worst of luck to the gang, the best of luck to genuine others and the company.

Goodbye.

Ps Stop bullying 121, he has some good insight.

AIMO

RNS

“Substantial funding will be required by the Company during the clinical trial phase and further funding will be sought by the Company prior to the commencement of the Phase I clinical trials.

The Company cannot be certain that such additional funding will be available on acceptable terms, or at all. To the extent that the Company raises additional funds by issuing equity securities, the Company's stockholders may experience dilution. Any debt financing, if available, may involve restrictive covenants. If the Company is unable to raise additional capital when required or on acceptable terms, it may have to (i) significantly delay, scale back or discontinue the development and/or commercialisation of one or more product candidates; (ii) seek collaborators for product candidates at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable and on terms that are less favourable than might otherwise be available; or (iii) relinquish or otherwise dispose of rights to technologies, product candidates or products that it would otherwise seek to develop or commercialise on unfavourable terms.”

IND approval plan.

I’ve been asked for my opinion on the question

Q, Is IND clearance “pretty much de-risked” ?

Firstly, what does de-risked mean to the majority ?

I would suggest, simply as it states, there remains little risk to the successful outcome.

A successful outcome would mean, IND clearance within the company expectation of time frame.

So why do I maintain that the risks are still, ever present.

Many here made a great big fuss and still are over the fact the FDA have accepted a plan, which if executed properly and fully would result in clearance. They make no mention of that acceptance being based on preliminary results.

The company has been more honest as you’d expect. They have highlighted and communicated the main issue and advised they have “developed a method to eliminate”.

The company has not yet advised that the “method” has been applied and produced the product suitable for full submission. They have advised they are confident in doing so and currently working on it.

So, why is IND clearance “pretty much de-risked” ?

We don’t know if the “method” will ultimately deliver the results the FDA need and we don’t know if indeed it does , wether it will be within the company’s expectations on time frame as there remains third parties execution risk.

I’m not arguing one way or another as to the ultimate success or failure I’m simply suggesting with reference to the RNS’s issued, Clearance is not “de-risked” as the majority would understand the phrase.

Having seen the half year report , the time frame to conclude and deliver the plan within a full submission to the FDA, seems now even more important.

VS himself has repeatedly stressed the importance of getting to clinical asap, it’s very clear why.

I wish LTH’s and the company the best of luck.

I’ll no longer be contributing here.

AIMO