RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:QuestionSo the selling shareholders will be getting shares of THera representing less than half of one percent of the outstanding shares maybe a little less maybe a little more......Peanuts compared to a royalty of 8% to 15% and even more on the revenue derived from the platform
palinc2000 wrote: My first reaction upon the acquisition of Katana was based on the public info available then based on the PR announcing the terms of the deal.Please click on the link below
https://stockhouse.com/news/press-releases/2019/02/25/theratechnologies-acquires-targeted-oncology-company-katana-biopharma-inc
qwerty22 wrote: Katana was a private company right?
According to the contract on SEDAR (sept 27 2019) ownership was pretty limited to a couple of LLPs and key employees. Some of them are now employees of thtx or consultants like RB. A lot are names we know. The sale contract stipulates a consultant contract for RB and 3 employment contracts for 3 of the other named sellors. So it isn't the case that the Katana sellors have disappeared into the ether.
The contract says they were paid in cash and Consideration Shares. I can't work out what portion was shares. On your point 2) if the share part of the deal was high then effectively they still have a dog in the race, although I'm prepared to believe it might be a fairly trivial amount.
Angiochem was at a fairly pivotal stage in its development, my unreliable memory says they were in late-stage clinical development. Katana would have needed to up its demands for time and resourses to go into IND-enabling and start the clinical process. From a practical perspective it was probably just a good time to cash in on what they achieved and focus their energies on Angiochem. We could speculate on why nobody else was interested, I think at the time Sortilin was a largely unknown cancer target, some good research papers but very few, it would be quite easy to think not enough had been proved about the target to warrant much interest or a higher price. In a sense thtx are having to prove both their molecule (Th1902) and their target (Sortilin). That's not the case for ADCs that are going after HER2 or VEGF or TROP2 or Folate receptor, there are drugs on the market that already target those, in that scenario you're just testing if your drug does that with a better profile.
of course the pedants are right this is not a lottery ticket because it's not just blind luck but in many ways at the time of the purchase it was untested (or not deep understood) so greater risk and uncertainty was probably true.
Just looking at the contract, here is the definition of the next milestone payment.
"“Second Development Milestone” means the results obtained from the Phase I clinical study showing the efficacy of the maximal tolerated dose and/or a reduction in toxicity of the peptide used in the Phase I clinical study which leads to the conclusion that additional clinical studies are justified to pursue the development of such peptide and after taking into account the costs and the risks associated with the further research and development of such peptide."
It's difficult to know if this means the end of Ph1 or the end of Ph1 part1. I tend to think end of part1 when you have the MTD. If that's the case then maybe it's unlikely they'll start taking about efficacy signals until part 1 is completed and you have the full data to make an informed judgement on efficacy/toxicity at the MTD. I definitely think they'd want to avoid triggering this milestone by talking about efficacy too early. It might be why they completely avoided talking about patient data at the KOL event and maybe means we don't see any data before the end of part1 in Aug/Sept.
palinc2000 wrote:
I agree that naming and shaming is not useful but I did not start that and I will retaliate whenever HE does it again.
My one and only purpose in being invested in THTX is to make money... and i call shots as I see them from my business background .
So when Katana was acquired I was bothered by 3 things
1- Katana had been looking for a partner and or a buyout for more than a year and in spite of the very low acquisition price there were no takers from biotechs and pharmas involved in oncology
2-Apart from a few low milestone payments related to the start of clinical trial and proof of concept the selling shareholders of Katana will not be receiving any royalties from any revenue related to the platform.Their confidence level in success did not seem very high
3- I also had concerns about diversification in oncology which was never ever hinted at before by management ....The fact that Christian has knowledge in oncology was not in my mind a valid reason to enter the field especially when considering 1 and 2 above.
So I called it a Lottery Ticket .... meaning high risk and low probability ....
Do I want the platform to be successful ? OF COURSE I DO
It has been almost 2 1/2 years since the acquisition and I that all pre clinical results since then point to the same direction...so I am hoping for the best
scarlet1967 wrote: Apart from personal naming and shaming from both sides I agree with palinc, we are all here to understand our investment based on openions often we make the right analysis and sometimes not.
These conversations are not about I said so you said so I am right your wrong etc.
To claim that one has been always right or one knows best is not correct or helpful.
To me a collective knowledge of all posters and their understandings are much more helpful than egotistical posts. We all have been wrong many times to claim anything but that is silly. Writing posts about how knowledgeable one is based on their whatever background is waste of time, your skills will be reflected in your analysis no point to justify it by self claiming that you have whatever background in various areas.