SPCEO1 wrote: You might want to tone down your criticism of TH's NASH efforts as if they sign a meaningful partnership, and they might, your past comments might undermine your reputation.
That being said, I have found the whole NASH partnership commentary by our CEO strange. The negotiating strategy seems to be that we ahve a great asset
but don't have enough money to develop it, so however you might like to proceed, dear partner, as long as you bring enough money to the table, we are offering a lot of flexibility.
If I were a partner looking to enter into negotiations with TH I would be a little confused, but maybe that is just me. The comments last week about being ready to start the trial in September
themselves were also odd. Why even say that? Are they trying to project strength that they don't really have?
In any event, I think cancer is now the easiest route to a higher share price in the short term and we are not far from when we will get some info that should help that process.
I also think NASH could be a surprise value enhancer for TH's stock before too much longer as well. But I am confused by the CEO's characterizations of the NASH
situation. It seems to me they need to have a better idea of what they are looking for in a NASH partnership and communicate that rather than communicating
a high degree of flexibility which sounds like weakness to me. It may not be weakness, but that is how I hear it. Anyone else annoyed by the CEO's NASH parntership comments?
qwerty22 wrote: Well the market thinks different to the PT, it's down 40% the past 12 months.
They have their first ever biopsy data end of this year, I expect the PT takes in that event being positive. If thtx had a biopsy readout end of this year rather than a vague partnering process then I'd be more excited about the program.
scarlet1967 wrote: If you look at their NASH trial they are dosing patients with various dosages to evaluate both safety and efficacy of their drug. THTX has a drug which has been in the market for a decade with no safety issues and they know the dosing.
Yes not many F2/F3 patients but an inovative approach based on totality of data with no safety issues whatsoever.
What I don't get is they get PT $3 despite having short of $70M revenues and ongoing oncology program which means the company is worth less than current value less than $300M from a NASH analyst (Ed Nash) and 89bio gets a PT over $1B from another analyst.
Now we can keep speculating about your breakdown of each project but the whole thing doesn't add up imo.
Wino115 wrote: If you want a valuation comp, you could justify that with a $350mil mkt cap, $170mil of cash and a $50mil burn rate that a standalone NASH P2 in a drug where expectations are modest for success (just looking at the huge price target vs. current price as a barometer of risk) should be worth around $200mil.
So a fantasy sum of the parts number on THTX would be HIV drugs worth $1.75, NASH worth $2.00, oncology option worth $1.50 = $4.25 .
I've never been a fan of sum of parts, but there's a rough gauge.
As I've done before, anything that lowers the discount applied to oncology by showing safety and efficacy provided huge leverage to any target given the size of the potential markets available for the drug.
qwerty22 wrote:
They also had Steven Harrison running their trial and promoting them last year at conferences I think.
Wino115 wrote:
It's believable, they went public last year and I believe Ed Nash at Cannacord was a big backer as underwriter.
maybe Leerink was on the deal too. Bit they have a few large underwriters that publish on them.
Their drug is a Fibroblast growth factor one (FGF21), and they've done pretty well in
Phase 2 trials. Akero is also an FGF21 approach and they've had great fat burner numbers.
as we know, FGF21 has also had a few safety issues to deal with. But the approach seems to:be better understood
by the market and accepted as a valid front runner approach. The world still doeant really know about GHRH for NASH.
scarlet1967 wrote:
This phase2b NASH company with a preclinical program for Severe Hypertriglyceridemia has a market cap at US over $370M. Couple days ago Leerink partners started covering the company with a buy rating with PT $62. Current SP about $19. As per financial they have $171 millions burn rate about $50 to $60 millions annually. No revenues!
https://www.google.com/url?rct=j&sa=t&url=https://www.analystratings.com/articles/leerink-partners-initiates-a-buy-rating-on-89bio-etnb/&ct=ga&cd=CAEYASoSNDc3NTA0NDExNTA3NDMwNTYzMhllMTJiNzk0YTA1MDAxYjJjOmNhOmVuOlVT&usg=AFQjCNHbSCll7IXXGGK5l1187Tr2HuzSmA
“As of June 30, 2021, 89bio had cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments of $171.0 million. R&D expenses were $15.6 million and $25.8 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2021, respectively, compared to $8.4 million and $16.2 million for the comparable periods in 2020. G&A expenses were $4.9 million and $9.5 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2021, respectively, compared to $3.2 million and $6.2 million for the comparable periods in 2020. 89bio reported a net loss of $20.7 million and $35.5 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2021, respectively, compared to a net loss of $11.8 million and $22.3 million for the comparable periods in 2020.”