RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:89 bio Many have not said it's purely a business decision, you have asserted it many times.
I can't understand how a decision about an individual clinical program can ring fence off the clinical content of that program from commercial decisions about that program. That makes no sense. Thtx don't have the cash, if they have the greatest NASH drug then they raise cash to support that program, that's biotech for dummies. It seems to me not having the cash is not an answer in itself, why don't they have the cash? Why can't they raise the cash?
They haven't proved they have the greatest drug, they are obliged to still prove none futility. Understand what that means. They havent yet proved they can hit the Ph3 endpoints. That's the clearest sign of where the clinical weakness lies, it's what the few Cheeto-munchers were flagging up from the start. It's almost the departing comment of the Barclay's analyst. It's why the market does not want to finance this, it's why it makes sense to say thtx don't (and will not) have the resourses to pursue this alone.
Let's start with this question. Do you think they haven't already gone out to seek financing for this project in all the time they've been talking to the regulators? I can't believe the answer is "no", it's too dumb and negligent of them. If the answer is "yes" then we have the answer to why they don't have the resources for it. The market wants nothing to do with this project. We could pick over why that is but it really doesn't matter, in this case it's the answer that matters.
One of the problems I have with you seeing everything thru the prism of messaging is that you seem to end up believing they are competent at everything else, that all outcomes are positive but somehow they just utterly fail at telling people all this. It's just not that extreme on any of those points. They ground out a Ph3 protocol, they over-achieved on that front. They failed to excite the market. The outcome has been to narrow the paths forward for the program to just partnering, that's not positive. The messaging may be weak but in my view it's reflected the complexity of the situation. You don't have to go to extremes to see something plausible.
I don't see them messaging anything new about NASH going forward unless Grinspoon brings out more research. The market is not going to assign any value until they see a contract with $$$ in it. You probably need to rethink some things because your frustration is likely just to grow because I just don't see things moving in the direction you want them to.
scarlet1967 wrote:
The cost of trials increases from phase to phase so does the probability of success. A phase 2 trial costs less than phase 3 but is valued less too. The commercial risks for phase 3 is less than phase 2 etc etc.
As many said many times this is a business decision for a company with limited resources, the reason market reacted to the news or better said didn't reacted to the news is the issue which has to be addressed, yes this is an asset which should be valued in the SP.
Not to ascribe any value to it in today's market when many R&D companies get fairly or unfairly valued based on future potentials is just not right. The potential of the protocol is there now than it's finalized it needs to be marketed. They couldn't or wouldn't talk about it publicly as per ongoing negotiations now they can and should.