Member Info for ThinIce

From the September 25 RNS:

"With a clear cash runway into 2027, and multiple near term clinical inflection points, we believe that we are well positioned to deliver value for our shareholders".

As has been pointed out to you many times.

Strange chap.

Turns up, listens to nothing, demonstrates a total lack of understanding of the business (based on one Vox video), the characters involved and how the stock market works.

Asks for apologies then says he’s getting nothing from the exchange.

And presumably he’s back to his 1974 issue of Razzle magazine.

Hopefully he hasn’t shut down the proper discussion.

Thanks for you reply.

Sure, I get your maths. I am simply saying that with a 7.5% stake, there is little the BOD can do outside of the market price and the activities of a potential bidder. There are some chunky buys going through (the ones we can see) and there is potentially some significant stake building going on behind the scenes. I suspect that we may see a TR1 if the price continues on this trajectory (it will be firmly on the radar of the institutions this week - hard to ignore!).

The timing of an approach is of course key. The only thing that matters is the trial results. Of course, J&J have given themselves early access to this by providing the drug FOC. That, I am sure, was their motivation and of course, a stroke of genius.

I want J&J to be the suitor as I am on my personal Myeloma journey. But I also want a good buyout price!

Under Rule 2.7, assuming the bidder has themselves acquired a requisite number of shares (usually 30%), the bidder can officially circulate an offer to the shareholders. the Board can then set out their view (which I believe is what you are alluding to) with advice on whether the terms are fair and reasonable. That is the limit of what they can do. The rest is down to the shareholders and whether they deem the offer to be good. As most shareholders will be retail and possibly (by that stage) small institutions who will be happy with a 25-50% premium, they most likely wont want to hang around for a potential 5/10 bagger, which may be the expectation (again as you allude to).

Its just how the stock market works.

Management only own 7.5% of the shares. They won’t have a choice.

I completely agree with this post.

I am talking to J&J about my own Challenge Trial for Myeloma. They seem to be so far ahead of anyone else in the field just now.

There is no way they are going to allow Poolbeg to side step them!

Thank you, excellent research!

Any idea what the 15.56 post ‘Passed’ is referring too?

Can you explain please?

There is no confirmation that the trial has started, although I had rather assumed that it must have as they are presenting data to the EHA in the coming days.

The intention was to deliver their findings in ‘summer 2026’ so it fits.

Hi Rusty

Not mine, I have submitted my data and am still awaiting acceptance.

Thanks for asking. TI

I would suggest that the following is of greater significance than the AGM:

Poolbeg Pharma (AIM: POLB, 'Poolbeg' or the 'Company'), a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with a core focus on transforming the cancer immunotherapy field, announces that it will present data on POLB 001 at the European Hematology Association Congress ("EHA"), taking place 11-14 June 2026 in Stockholm, Sweden.

Cheers Rusty - I'll make sure I do that. Much appreciated!

Thanks Rusty - I’ve put myself forward for a couple of trials. Here’s hoping 🤞

This could be huge.

I have multiple myeloma and I’m expected to relapse after stem cell transfusions (we all do as it’s incurable) and then it’s a question of looking for other options, of which there are many.

Assuming the trials are effective, any idea how quickly this could get to market?

It’s a waste of time he won’t respond.

He’s still hung up on cash balance in 12 months time, failing to realise that the critical data is due later this year.

I fail to understand why people clog these boards with their opinions when they know nothing about the business.

The disappointing part about all of this is that share performance is largely dictated by the above 2 factors.

The former is to some extent the more immediate measure and will have the more reactive results. If the business is doing well, the share price will respond accordingly and vice-versa. Whether the business was actually doing well (without the recognition of the iliad contract) is a matter for further debate. For the record, I think the figures without, would have looked horrendous and iliad have possibly saved us.

The share price rose as almost everyone believed that iliad was not included in the fee recognition and this was a further cherry on the cake. As it turns out, this was a false assumption.

What we now have is a sentiment (or trust) problem and Mo has set us back quite considerably. A trust issue is harder to overcome. My understanding for what its worth, is that under the 'new order book model' the company would only recognise up front (non-cancellable) deposits and that this would only be after a client had signed a contract. Previously the company was recognising the value of the full contract within the order book.

This new model should therefore have been applied equally to fee recognition. It does not make sense that there should be one rule for the order book and another for fee recognition. Once recognised, the fee should leave the order book and move to fee recognition, but should not appear in either until a contract is signed.

I am not even sure that recognising fees on a contract that has not yet been signed is morally (and perhaps legally) correct.

We now have a trust issue which I think is going to be far harder to overcome in the short term. This is where sentiment in my view is a more critical component in the potential valuation and I retract my earlier post where I say I am looking for a 15-20p short term valuation. We now need to build back from this debacle and to say I am royally p1ssed off with the management team is an understatement.

Why would a fund raise be necessary?

They have a sizeable cash balance, up front fees (at least 10%) from Iliad on the way and recognising the Iliad income in 2026/7 (according to the RNS). Not to mention Traws Pharma!

Makes no sense!?

Very low volumes so far - expect there is a worked order in the background which we should see go through in the next 24 hours.

At least we now have something to hang our hats on and shouldn’t be subject to the volatility that comes with drip feeding RNSs to the market and general shareholder frustration.

We don’t actually need another HCT contract for a year+ and this is despite the fact that Mo has confirmed there are others in negotiation.

I predict a long steady climb over the remainder of the year and into next. I would be happy with that. My price target short term is 15-20p, but I’m holding this year and next (minimum).

The cash raise was in May 25. The statement regarding the 2027 runway was September 25.

I’m not getting your point.

Mo said to look out for the RNS on the Iliad deal. There is no question of it dropping, it’s simply about the value.