RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Some Thoughts in SummaryI am a long time shareholder, participant in prior raises and private placements, have followed this board over the years but posted very infrequently.
I tend to agree with JD and much of his thinking here.
This proposed buyout of Biosis seems very disrespectful to current shareholders, and certainly not in line with prior guidance of being value accretive and non dilutive…
The current fire sale for which Bioasis is being offered up for would lead a person to come to one of two logical conclusions, that XB3 does not work or that something more nefarious is afoot. The pittance for which the company and its technology are currently valued would suggest that the MTAs, licensing deals currently under contract etc, are expected to bear no fruit, that no party out there that has kicked the tires of XB3 see significant value. Prior up front license fees for limited indications were essentially on par with what the whole company is now being sold for. And where has XB3-001 been, why has it vanished from corporate presentations, the once touted flagship asset which was said to have potential valuations into the billions in metastatic er+ breast cancer, now not even mentioned in Bioasis material. In fact, the last mention of XB3-001 was when it was on the now infamous slide at road show stating it was “licensed to Ellipses” under the “New Partnerships” section. This error of disclosure needs to be explained, as a statement like this does not appear in a corporate presentation as a typo or the product of fat fingers on the keyboard. It clearly was not supposed to be disclosed to this particular audience, but the verbiage would suggest a deal had been done and some parties knew about it, and others were clearly not supposed to know, this it where the error occurred.
If any one of the announced or unannounced partnerships are expected to come in for Bioasis, then they theoretically should make our current valuation seem ridiculous and insulting. So, again, either the technology doesn’t work, or something else is going on.
As I digest this latest disappointing news on this rather long saga that is the Bioasis investment journey, I am struggling to find a scenario where I could ever vote yes on this deal. A yes in my mind essentially gives the company away to the financiers and leaves those of us shareholders holding an empty bag at the end. With that said, I am not sure I see another way out of this for current stakeholders as we are backed against the wall, and I am unclear exactly what the implications of a no vote would mean, i.e. does Lind get our IP after defaulting on loan. I would be interested in hearing more about other options, such as the apparent interested investor(s) earlier in year who wanted to invest but deal could not get done due to TSX restrictions, or whatever the reason was. It would seem that if XB3 is not dead and there is hope for one of the irons in the fire to produce some value, we need a bridge to get us there, not a complete massively dilutive fire sale of the whole platform and company.
Open to all critique and criticism.