Member Info for TRENCH123

Reference the licencing deal announced by Sareum today, here is an extract from an RNS issued by PYC on 11th January, 2017 relating to an initial payment made by them to PYC for work carried out on a Chk1 Inhibitor (which I think is now referred to as SRA737). Just wondering if PYC are now entitled to a further payment ?

'On the 5th December 2016 Physiomics announced an initial payment by Sareum for modelling carried out by the Company in 2010 to support the identification of an optimal combination regime of a Chk1 inhibitor and a DNA-targeting chemotherapy using the pre-clinical version of the Company's Virtual Tumour technology. The payment was triggered by a number of pre-conditions including the announcement on 27th September 2016 by Sareum that its partner, the CRT Pioneer Fund, had licensed exclusive and worldwide rights for a Chk1 inhibitor cancer drug candidate CCT245737 (to be renamed PNT737) to ProNAi Therapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ: DNAI)'

I agree that the placing should have been at well in excess of 1p. Good that you recognize this also

'Reflecting on an incredible year here at @Physiomics. !🎉 We were proud to sign 10 new contracts this year, including projects with existing clients such as @Numab_Tx, @Bicycle_Tx, @Merckgroup and @AnkyraTx, as well as welcoming 4 new clients to our network'

Siennaj, I take your point. The new offices are supposedly going to result in a cost saving of c £30k pa

As per RNS 3rd October 2023 ref Biostatistics

''We'll be providing a further update on our expansion into this field later this calendar year."

In the latest Business Update on 17th November JM gave the impression that the move into Biostatistics would have only modest impact in the current financial year, so maybe we will not hear anything more for some while

Tweet from PYC today :-

'Reflecting on a fruitful 2023 of growth! New team members, clients, collaborations, and a shiny new office – it’s been a great year! So much more to come, stay tuned for our 2023 highlights! '

I note with interest the 'so much more to come'. Lets see what materializes over the next few months, we are certainly overdue some contract news

I believe the experienced management team which PYC have assembled over the last 12 months or so will start to show through in improved results over the next 12 months. I particularly like the appointment of Shalabh Kumar who has a strong industry background :

'Mr Shalabh Kumar is a proven business executive with over 30 years of experience within the life sciences consulting and services industry. Shalabh co-founded, and subsequently was the Chief Executive Officer of Kinapse, a life sciences consulting and outsourcing service provider. The company was later acquired by Syneos Health® (Nasdaq: SYNH) after growing to employ over 600 people across UK, India and US'

Interestingly, Dr Pete Sargent has links to Syneos Health

PYC being awarded one of only 17 Innovate UK grant awards from the £10m allocation shows the importance of the project. Financial considerations aside, this must be seen as a major achievement for PYC

I agree with your sentiments on the share price but the review does contain a number of positives for PYC long term holders

This share site sometimes gets a bit like a Monty Python sketch

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohDB5gbtaEQ

Share 4 Please can I ask you a genuine question also :-

Where do you see PYC share price at the end of 2023 ?

Please try to be polite, even if you don't agree

The fact that PYC have obtained a significant grant after the losses it incurred is testament to an underlying financial resilience which must have been independently verified by Innovate UK. Of course the placing was a disappointment, as it has been for other AIM companies doing placings at this time, but the share price has recovered very well since that time and the company is currently trading in line with expectation

PYC has come out of the £500k loss (cash flow reduction in year £271k) and 1p raise remarkably well in my opinion, demonstrating an underlying resilience which is pleasing

I seem to recall Kidlington doing some research a few months back to try and establish the background to Gary Marshall, a ‘significant’ shareholder in PYC in the most recent website update, but cannot recall his conclusions

There is a person with this name who is a Senior Director in Repare Therapeutics . His role is ‘Project lead for early phase clinical development of first-in-class precision oncology therapeutic’. Repare Therapeutics are based in Boston (USA) which is now the largest biotech hub in the world.

PYC have links with Boston having participated in the Annual Meeting of the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) which was held there in November 2022. One of PYC’s clients Ankyra Therapeutics is also based in Boston

I agree that people who are averse to any risk taking at all should not be on AIM. It is not for everyone that's for sure.

However, you have to accept that people who are here know fully the extra risks and the potential greater rewards involved and it is their choice. No amount of persuasion will change their mind

You cannot value a company by purely looking at the profits/losses it is making, some of the 'asset' value is hidden and only gets crystallised if it should get acquired. Interested companies do not normally accumulate share holdings bit by bit in these smaller AIM companies they just negotiate a value for outright acquisition. The values paid can sometimes be very surprising, particularly in the biotech sector

I genuinely believe that the guys at PYC are dedicated individuals striving to improve cancer and other health outcomes, with some success I would say. I for one would not be criticising their efforts

I think the Government authorities would not have allocated £500k + funding to a project in which PYC is pivotal unless they could be certain PYC were sufficiently well funded to see the two year project through to a successful conclusion

Indications are that the issues experienced last year (Merck business in particular) which were the main factor in the high loss figure arising (but this still left £416k in cash before the fund raise) are being overcome by growth of the non-Merck client base and progression into new areas of business. JM commented recently that PYC were trading in line with expectations this financial year to date, which to me does not sound like a repeat of last year

These are purely my own observations. I am happy to accept that others view things quite differently

I am happy to wait and see

I suspect the fundraise was arranged, in part at least, to bolster the financial position in connection with the subsequently successful Innovate grant application. The Government guidelines on assessing grants over £100k include a check for 'evidence of financial distress or over-reliance on grant funding' . This condition must have been fully satisfied for the grant to be approved

The 1p placing was undoubtedly a setback, but this is now history. The company should be in a position to move forward with its growth plans with decent cash resources behind it

Very Interesting. How has random selection worked for you ?

The MRI scanning will help to reduce the number of invasive biopsies required. I think we would have heard something if PYC were involved in any way with the vaccine trials

The attached link may provide further information on the trials :

https://prostatecanceruk.org/about-us/news-and-views/2023/02/our-new-research-shows-the-uk-may-finally-be-ready-for-prostate-cancer-screening