Member Info for Vander

Sorry-Last bit- we do not progress the discussion

Slipperz post detailing the Persia project slide indicates that wsg’s role includes training, supervision and management of staff, I accept recruitment was not mentioned I do not believe our lucrative contract involves only training. That would not relate to payment according to pax, and would also not justify a 25 year stipulation. The company providing a training only contract in Egypt had a much shorter contract The above role in addition to supply of equipment means we should be part of The Salam orat- is there any evidence of this? Happy to be corrected by those with more knowledge but please be comprehensive with links or evidence as appropriate- otherwise we do not the discussion

Good. We need to get into Salam ASAP (SL 150k pax vs Salam 15m vs Iranshahr first phase 25m and final phase 100m) It’s hard to foresee wsg managing such a huge jump in capacity but success at Salam would give some credibility

There are 4 foreign companies competing to finance, design, build and operate the Iranshahr terminal. There are also 4 domestic competitors To reach this stage they were required to provide an LOI guaranteeing bank finance and appropriate insurance The finance model will be build-operate - transfer (bot) This suggests that some progress is being made in planning/ securing finance/ insurance for large projects in Iran. Also is it correct that the operator will choose the Iranshahr security and equipment rather than IAC?

We have been told that AZ have met with us and specified research and product development that will be necessary for them to provide further investment.

This is in the context of winding up the medimmune brand after 30 years and integrating into r&d units on the Cambridge site with two main arms- oncology and bio pharmaceuticals. A number of medimmune senior executives moved on, inc the ceo, but there were no redundancies and all collaborations and partnerships are ongoing.

Unfortunately this all happened at the same time as the N4p meeting and this may have impaired their risk appetite and resulted in temporary budgetary constraints. N4p would have wanted financial recompense for exclusivity to the 9 month data- Medi would probably only wanted this for research on HPV pDNA which could be market sensitive- it is possible N4p agreed to keep this confidential anyway and only released results for OVA

If a collaboration is defined by ongoing communication/ forthcoming review meeting(s) then this is intact, with further research monies dependent on further results demonstrating successful immune response with other target antigens ( should be achievable as likely to work similarly from one dna plasmid to another) and ‘efficacy’ ( this needs definition). Also successful manufacture and eu- ncl characterisation ( essential for Emea CTA)

It’s quiet at the minute, though we have had a recent broker note, white paper and nigel’s interview to consider A to do list? Main one is get a commercial partner for human trials in 2020/21. Beyond that is beefing up the data package and spreading the word/ promotion Nigel seems confident on transfer to a gmp industrial scale partner by q3 They plan replication of positive results re loading/ transfection and immune response with other pDNA antigens (UoA) and hopefully quality of response will not be lost with manufacture scale up They need data in RNA, peptides, small molecules to markedly broaden their market- they may need to modify the particle for each- rna is the priority Nigel refers to the need to show efficacy- for oncology products that prob means testing on animal models of cancer. For vaccines a broad and large cellular and humoral immune response The investment appetite to optimise nucleicacid delivery is likely to increase- this will take years- the delivery research is the current priority- either by modifying rna/dna, optimising liposome or polymer ( the rna 2019 conference in London was all on this). Also a key bit is the recipient cell ( is it an APC/ dividing or not etc) as important that the reagent. Hopefully nuvec will get a look in This needs patience- main results q3/4

Stem cell transplantation is too aggressive a treatment in lieu of the current anti-retroviral drugs which are quite effective It indicates that the ccr5 receptor on cells is a worthwhile target- via which the HIV virus may enter cells- hence gene editing a protective mutation may be worthwhile ie gene therapy

Thanks slipperz. V helpful Do the project Persia plans still apply? Were these agreed pre sanctions?

Yep, We are a bit unlucky- the big changes happened following 10 jan announcement by pascal soriot- a few of the senior medimmune leadership team have left including the ceo, Bahija Jallal. It makes sense for AZ but did not help us in the short term I agree it may have had budget restrictions as you mention or at least affected their risk appetite for the jan N4p meeting Nigel would not have known this when he wrote his nov rns

This is a big change

The Medimmune brand has been retired and biologics integrated into AZ
The organisational changes were announced in Jan 19 and implemented from 14th Feb
medi will move to new integrated R&D units at the new Cambridge biomedical centre

Could this have affected medi's decision to confirm extension of the N4P collaboration also due in Jan/Feb19?
Its currently on hold- maybe whilst AZ sorts sorts itself out

Worth noting that: 'MedImmune’s external collaborations and partnerships will continue'

https://www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk/business/medimmune-brand-retired-as-its-work-is-integrated-into-astrazeneca-9061920/

PF is better than trump- he is not a racist

Can I check-were Beaumont the nomad until approx March 18 during the phantom oman period- have they actually gone to prison?

I don’t like hugh’s suggestion that he has inside knowledge. Do you think he may be a teenage family member of David farrier? On the positive side we are due results from UoA phase1- that started early jan19 and was due to take approx 4 weeks- add time for discussions with gowans lab on how to proceed (if the results are positive) if not it’s back to optimising the manufacturing process from the scale up 0.5 to 17g

I agree it’s unlikely to be Namibia Uirab is a nationalist who likes training and developing his own

Bisey uirab is due to be named new ceo of the chaotic NAC this week. He did a good job for the ports. He is a patriot

The meeting with s4ga was August 2017. It does not mention IKIA but clearly the second runway needs lighting installed Opening of the second runway would be a core part of their airport expansion plans and requires a host of underlying infra-structure in addition to the lighting It’s chicken and egg- what’s the point of expansion with associated expenditure if the demand is not yet there. Is it worth upgrading security provision if the ‘airport city’ is not yet ready to launch. Wsg and s4ga are both desperate to get in there but financing and insurance is stopping them. Also IAC cannot expand in a piecemeal fashion

For those who are interested:

https://www.airport-suppliers.com/supplier-press-release/s4ga-support-upgrade-iranian-airports-airfield-lighting/

Wikipedia:Runways[edit]
There are currently two runways at IKA of which only one is operational. The operational runway is equipped with the ILS CAT II since August 2009. A second ILS system was purchased seven years ago to serve the other runway but the selling firm refused to set it up due to sanctions against Iran. The ILS was installed by Iranian technicians but malfunctioned and was indefinitely switched off.[15] A third runway positioned to the south of the existing runways and passenger terminal is in final stages of construction.
Hotels[edit]

The point of the S4GA post was that IAC have clearly approached a number of ‘high quality, specialist’ small foreign contractors, without USA connections who can make a difference to their airport infra structure and service They did this 2016-18, all with the promise of later expansion to the other Iranian airports- the s4ga website says 80! Iac are unlikely to engage these foreign contractors piecemeal- they are all subject to similar sanction conditions This is not good news for our 30 day rampers! But it is good news for the long term

The second runway at IKIA has been closed indefinitely until they can get the ILS cat11 (lighting system) to function The supplier declined to instal it due to fear of sanctions and local engineers have been unsuccessful during the interim 7 years S4ga were invited by IAC on 09/08/17 to rectify the situation They are a polish company providing airfield lighting and no mention of them online since, in connection with Iran Maybe one to track?