Member Info for Whisp3rs39

All good Rev, understood & respected.

Atb.

I don't, I did initially when the report came out but further reading and whats become apparent, as i now understand, we do not. However, I'm also not 100% sure we couldn't put a claim in or it need to be settled in courts if another company got the rights. All this needs to be explained by those involved somehow. I should have requested this as a question for AGM in fairness or gone myself.

The initial prospectus leaves the door open in some regards, and all i can go on from what i can find:

3. CNRS

As part of the collaboration arrangements, ImmuPharma has entered into a research collaboration agreement with CNRS which relates to the therapeutic use of peptides and peptide derivatives. ImmuPharma has been granted the worldwide exclusive rights to exploit all discoveries made pursuant to this agreement and will co-own the relevant intellectual property with CNRS. CNRS has granted additional exclusive worldwide licences to ImmuPharma France covering the rights to discoveries made prior to this agreement but related to it. Applications for additional patents, to be jointly owned by CNRS and ImmuPharma, have already been and are being filed. CNRS is entitled to a share of the revenue generated by ImmuPharma from the exploitation of CNRS’s licensed and co-owned rights.

I do find it hard to get my head around how some of this wording works out in the real world but lines like, Relevant intellectual property, research collaboration agreement, pursuant to this agreement... the absence of 'future discoveries' and that we know IMM wasnt involved or named on the paper makes it hard or impossible to assume we have automatic rights on new developments in an area outside of the original research collaboration agreement, as i now understand it... However, it doesn't explicitly say for autoimmune only in the prospectus but does state derivatives. The patent filing by IMM does mention autoimmune only & so some confusion was born and obviously we (IMM) is currently only protected on that front.

Comments from AGM lead me to believe IMM are in discussion to get this sorted & with the existing connections between IMM, CNRS & Prof.S.Muller, I am hopeful all involved will not want to cause a mess, fractions and/or bitterness by splitting the use of P140 into separate companies unless is makes sense for all involved.

Welcome to some clarity if I'm misreading or misunderstanding an aspect of this.

Atb.

My investment here is tucked away out of my mind and need. Like a few others, I'm very comfortable with having these funds sit here bobbing up and down while we wait, I am not trading this but well done to those that are successfully. Accept my and others position with the same grace please... msuk, thats kinda directed at yourself. Our position is what it is, we are all in different positions of life and risk appetite, we should accept it, I see no need to diss or over educate someone for not taking the same road as ourselves, however much we think we're saving them from mistakes. Fine to make our points but can we leave it there?

I am hopeful with the existing relationship with CNRS, any issue regarding rights to glioblastoma development will be resolved with IMM being shared rights owners with CNRS & UoM having a royalty benefit down the line, since they patented the results and marker (or along the lines of this set up). Again, imo, this has probably caused further delay but also gives us potentially another huge market where P140 could come into play. Obviously IMM can not come out and state this atm until the rights regarding glioblastoma are absolutely with IMM.

I understand that this is not strictly sticking to the facts Rev and somewhat theoretical thinking in areas but I am still confident of a positive outcome here, hence why I'm still in, here & not leaving until that lady sings or closes the curtains.

If those buying could be so kind to keep it low though till mid next week so I can take advantage of this dip, it would be greatly appreciated.

Atb whichever way you're going.

Gla.

2

I find it hard to believe that recent developments coming from UoM have not caused further complications to discussions with potential partners and made negotiations even more difficult... Ip rights, market value etc... there's a absolute shed loads of legals, unknown potential value issues, who gets what now & in the future, how much needed for P3 autoimmune, is glioblastoma included etc... to go through. I'm sure there's a shed load more things I or we don't know about being discussed, especially for a first in class product with ongoing developments, what other areas are under research & by who that we don't know of and what do they want to look into but can't currently afford to do? Whoever is buying may be trying to make sure future development go to themselves whilst IMM may be wanting to keep developments in other areas open to renegotiation or vise versa, IMM looking to sell the lot for cash and royalty while big pharma want their selected market, which would be less than the full value that IMM are possibly pushing for... I do not see any straight forward way this could be negotiated but I do not feel entitled to know those now as they are key details to ongoing discussions and come under confidentiality atm... I am increasingly convinced by P140 though. Imo, it's increasingly hard to believe this could have been achieved in 6 months or less, which does make Tim's comments one of the biggest unrealstic blunders I've seen for some time... & why deadlines will most likely and hopefully won't reappear. Sounds like he hopefully recognises this from the statement of, 90% of 2&1/4 hours of AGM was Q&A, but only time will tell on that. Yes I've heard about his track record, and as Dr. House says (forgot who keeps stating House but this for you); people never change & everybody lies. Keep that in mind but every situation is different, it's a good job we're talking about a science led product imo.

Also bear in mind, P140 is a first in class development and so I would and should not have expected discussions and negotiations to be done and dusted in the time frames previously stated. Yes, it sure peed me off we was told that by the top dog in charge but also partly my own mistake for also getting caught up in excitment without pushing as far as I could to get the answers I wasn't asking.

However, how we can have further validation of P140 mechanics but still come to the conclusion a deal is hanging by a thread, stalling or off the table completely because a line wasn't included in last RNS is absurd to me and imo, it's emotions talking over intelligence, just the same as Tim's comments of deal in 2025, though yours absolutely hold less consequences..

1

Https://x.com/i/status/2070494772804866512

Perfect and the right answers from them.

Much appreciated.

Have a lovely weekend all.

Hi Mike, much appreciation for attending and feeding back. Was any statement made in regards to ip rights with the new glioblastoma development?

Was any statement made in relation to Tim being CEO & Chairman? This latter relates to my opinion being Tim may not have made the 2025 deal comments if he had someone on a similar level to keep those kind of misjudgements in check.

Again, thanks for your time. Not managed to take advantage of yesterday's hysteria yet, need a few more days for funds to clear but in the patience camp. Atb

He's blatantly a troll fishing for likes... can't write a paragraph without something underhanded in there. Filtered.

I remember watching a tv show years ago called Hollyoaks, had all the worst actors... go for it, goforit1

Cheers Cyrox, the 9:44 trades are showing as unknown but wasn't 'late trades' as such, maybe 5-10 minutes delayed. I will assume your explanation still applies to these as institutional trades. From what I can see on L2 and with current situation in mind, I would agree & I am under the impression we are being held here for these trades to come through before breaking higher.

Cheers & atb.

Any idea why trades close to the ask and not delayed are still coming up as unknown? Some really nice buys by looks of it. L2 also looks like a tight hold in this area until news.

Cheers in advance.

Atb.

Xviolet... that's made my day already... haha. Welcome back to 2026.

Imo, this research paper still adds weights a validation of P140 in general. Even if we are not automatic beneficiaries of this research moving forward, we may still have a claim to its use & one would assume due to existing relationships, we would be a frontrunner if a deal needed to be arranged.

That's me done for tonight. Have a good evening all.

Rebarm, you're right. Apologies, wasnt fully satisfied with my previous answer & now I have to slightly go against it and statement of fully vetting info before posting. The shame, I feel it!

The original agreement in prospectus states: 3.CNRS

ImmuPharma has important collaboration arrangements with CNRS, the French government

scientific institution and has also links with INSERM, France’s national institute for health and

medical research. As part of the collaboration arrangements, ImmuPharma has entered into a

research collaboration agreement with CNRS which relates to the therapeutic use of peptides and

peptide derivatives. ImmuPharma has been granted the worldwide exclusive rights to exploit all

discoveries made pursuant to this agreement and will co-own the relevant intellectual property with

CNRS. CNRS has granted additional exclusive worldwide licences to ImmuPharma France

covering the rights to discoveries made prior to this agreement but related to it. Applications for

additional patents, to be jointly owned by CNRS and ImmuPharma, have already been and are

being filed. CNRS is entitled to a share of the revenue generated by ImmuPharma from the

exploitation of CNRS’s licensed and co-owned rights.

However, with this research paper and IMM absent from it and its filing, things become murky without knowing if any amendments have been made which gives IMM automatic rights. If its not collaboration or a separate collaboration, things become unclear. Needs to be a question at AGM. Again, apologies, no agenda but the truth.

Just double checked... the deal between CNRS and IMM gives IMM 'exclusive worldwide right' on the peptide P140, not just for use in autoimmune disease, although the latter part does need confirming in writing for me. However the wording of Worldwide exclusive rights says to me, IMM & CNRS would need to be included one way or another in any further development involving P140. I.e. glioblastoma.

Atb

Nolupus, are you concerned CNRS has the ability to pull the rug from IMM on P140?

If so, no need to worry, had a look into this when first looking at IMM, IMM are under no performance contract or anything similar, they have the rights to licence and commercialise P140 which can not be taken away. Not by Prof.S.Muller or CNRS. It would have to be voluntarily released by IMM, no court order could make this happen. Not sure how many different ways there are of saying it but in general IMM have full control. From my understanding and research. Welcome to be challenged or corrected on this but I believe this is very accurate to the truth. As to the current relationship between IMM & CNRS, I personally have no idea but nothing is pointing towards a break down in relationship from what I've come across.

Atb.

If I had over £150k invested here or anywhere, think I'd be spending hours fully vetting each and every piece of information before coming to such a conclusion and posting my thoughts on a BB. Ow wait, I & many others have under 10% of that but still do. It's clear who does and who doesn't.

Lesson here, don't follow or take value from those portraying to be more wealthy or invested than yourself, especially from Jekyll & Hyde type characters.

2nd lesson, Dyor and challange your own thoughts before posting & that goes both ways.

Glalth. Time to fill the belly with a good old sunday roast.

Rev, the BBC article relates to CAR-T therapy, genetically engineered cell therapy, P140 is not this. P140 is repeated injections & does not involve taking blood from patients as this treatment does. Don't mean to offend you but unfortunately this BBC article is not IMM. We will have our day, just not today.

Https://youtu.be/ia6p_H3Ppm8?is=P-UqOQUco7jowFKj

About 35 mins in.

Won't lie, your last response confused me.

Have a nice weekend all.

Roger, I have you filtered but saw ur comment on a page im not logged in on, I have faith p140 will be truly groundbreaking & ericnat's find adds a whole lot of weight behind that. But this BBC lupus article, sadly doesn't match for me but good find non the less.