RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:The recent Option Grant.KBC asked,
"...why is the current plan to pay for the upcoming Phase II study -- right before the NASDAQ listing -- with a financing? Why won't we have more than sufficient cash to fund it?...."
Now, there be several interesting questions in there.
I don't think a NASDAQ listing can happen until Q2 or Q3 of 2023. There's just too much to do.
I think a financing is not for the CRES101 clinical trial. I think the financing is for pocket money, engaging CRES101 clinical trial sites, and to allow Ladenburg Thalmann clients to wet their beaks on the Bioasis project.
I think it's possible, probable, even, that Bioasis knows exactly how it's funding a CRES101 clinical trial and how it's going to position itself for a NASDAQ listing. I think there's a possibility that Bioasis will have sufficient revenue, cash and market cap to make a straight qualification for NASDAQ.
My point is, generally, that these things will be hard to accomplish by doing things like selling xB3-001 for $10 million upfront and $100 million in milestones. A NASDAQ listing would not create any buzz at all if xB3-001 is sold for less than 2% of the AZ/DS deal with both drugs having such blockbuster potential.
I guess a question would be, was AstraZeneca crazy paying that much for a trastuzumab drug? If they weren't then Bioasis ought to get more than 1.5% to 2% of that number. xB3-001 and Enhertu do not directly compete. Enhertu is not indicated for the same patients for whom Herceptin is indicated. xB3-001 could take over all of the Herceptin HER2+ market by virtue of its brain tumour prophylactic value in early breast cancer treatment. It could prevent brain tumours for a period similar to Herceptin efficacy in the periphery.
I would hate to see Bioasis capitulate on the value of xB3-001.
jd