Theratechnologies Inc T.TH

Alternate Financing for NASH

[SPCEO1]

Paul mentioned they are pursuing alternate methods to finance the NASH phase III trial. What might that include?

One option would be to spin off TH's NASH assets as a spearate company. If they did that it would be fascinating to see the brokers suddenly ascribing value to NASH as they compete to get the lucrative fees in the listing. It should not be too hard to separate the NASH assets either. Probably two of the best companies to compare TH's NASH asset to would be AKER and IVA. They have market caps of $866 million and $535 million respectively. 

TH could list TheraNASH (my suggested name) for a valuation of $500 million with TH keeping  60% of TNSH's stock (my suggested symbol) for itself and with the other $200 million going directly to TNSH to fund the trial.

We are at the top of a huge bubble. Brokers like large fee income. Something like this could probably be pulled off.

[PWIB123]

I love this idea.

[qwerty22]

I had a thought of this as well but didn't know how doable it was. It seems a way to force a valuation and also limit the risk to the company somewhat.  

[SPCEO1]

Technically, it is doable. The issue is the  valuation. If IVA and AKEr can get that type of valaution then I am not sure why it would be all that difficult to find three US brokers who would be willing to pitch that. As I said, we are at the top of a bubble and brokers would love the fee's on a $200 million offering. The comparables are legit as IVA just started its phase III and AKRO is

[Wino115]

I have a hard time believing a market that currently ascribes a rather low value to the asset would readily accept it at a massively higher valuation.  One bigger than the current company they could buy for less.   One alternative was put up here before.  It was a healthcare oriented venture bank that lent to biotech projects for future revenue streams.  I don't recall

[SPCEO1]

But who is that market ascribing that value? Mackie, Canaccord and NBF - not a very influential gorup. MAckie is still only saying a 25% chance of success, Canaccord ran some numbers but really did not work hard at it and NBF has not run any numbers. Why is anyone accepting this lame evaluation of TH's NASH asset? What if Piper, Raymond James and HC Wainwright ran the offer and said they

[SPCEO1]

Also, the big question on this is does the endorsement of the three scientists, Harrison's perhaps being the most significant, fill the data gap and allow a more proper valuation of TH's NASH asset. Up until the KOL, many were leery of putting AKRO, IVA and Th on equal NASH footing. Is that still a legit argument. I mean, these are the NASH sector's biggest consultants - that must mean

[Wino115]

I don't disagree with the optimistic view the asset is on par with the others and it does mean something to have Harrison (especially) and Loomba understand and see the scientific validity. They also made that point that safety befell a number of drugs and this is past that and only  on the efficacy stage. I do believe in the science around tesamorelin and the liver/fat and think one day

[qwerty22]

I think in some regards they are on a par with AKRO and Iva and in some very important ways they aren't. Putting it simplistically I say Iva and AKRO have both got over that non-futility hurdle and thtx have yet to do that. So I just took a look at iva's data. The have biopsy data in 247 patients. ~80 placebo, and ~80 in two different dose groups. They are hitting both endpoints (fibrosis