Why IMU is a multi multi bagger, page-21514

Thank you for your response, and I do appreciate the costs of a Nasdaq listing. But if I may take a few moments to explain my rationale.

Every time someone mentions a NASDAQ listing everyone comes out of the woodwork with Paul said this, and Leslie mentioned that. It’s going to happen at the right time. Following such and such an announcement. My take on is that although the directors of a publicly listed company are not legally obliged to return increased value to shareholders, it is every shareholders right to expect such an outcome when investing. With this in mind as a company director you owe it to yourself to position your stock where it can obtain the strongest demand. That is because like all products, the price is determined by supply and demand. It’s Economics 101. Why are there so many cars on Parramatta Road in Sydney? Because that’s where people go looking for cars. If three people are in a service station in need of 100 litres of petrol, and there is only 100 litres available, what’s going to happen to the price of petrol? I think it’s going to go up. If there is a housing shortage, what happens to the price of rent? And so on and so forth…

.

Therefore taking into consideration these facts and this simple equation you would ideally like to list on the bourse(s) where your stock is likely to obtain the most interest, the greatest demand as it were. And for those unaware, that happens to be on the NASDAQ, not the ASX, when it comes to oncology stocks. Take CG Oncology on the left (see above), as but one example, as that is the stock we have been discussing, given its similarities to Imugene. With an average volume of 1.33 million shares traded each day, that equates to over $66 million USD every day or over $100 million Australian dollars a day.

On the left we see only an average volume of 16.66 million or about $1.836 million AUD being traded each day for Imugene IMU. Forgive me for stating the obvious but the amount of IMU shares being traded is chicken feed when compared to Nasdaq stocks such as CG Oncology. There simply isn’t the demand for small biotechs here in Australia, hence the low volumes. Large funds, institutions, sophisticated investors and wrap accounts aren’t looking to the ASX for their emerging fund or biotech investments, many of them do not have a mandate to trade here. Even if they did, most prefer to trade in Euros or USD when it comes to their emerging international funds. You only have to look at the institutions on the register of NASDAQ shares such as Replimune, as opposed to Imugene, to see who’s investing. Its large US institutions, not a handful of farmers, staff members and their associates.

@Steini thanks for your post. The poster was referring to an earlier post of mine on oncolytic viral therapy wherein I cited CG Oncology. You can catch up with it here https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/why-imu-is-a-multi-multi-bagger.5431324/page-358#post-72411488 if you wish

@farmhouse what you say is true, illogical is the opposite of logical, obviously. But I never said or in fact stated that because to me the price of IMU at 11 cents was illogical, that I believed its future prospects warranted a higher valuation. To do so would to the naked eye infer I was recommending the stock. Or placing a higher price target on the stock. But in reality if the investor were to do their own research, as I am suggesting they do, they may well reach the conclusion that the anticipated valuations of stock such as CG Oncology are too high, hence creating the illogical equation alluded to by me.

It’s important when discussing stocks to use specific language as ones ideas and opinions may be misconstrued, or misrepresented, as they so often are on these threads. Further to which, despite being an IMU bull, I would like to be remembered for taking a balanced approach to posting, wherever possible.

DYOR Seek investment advice as and when required Opinions only