Why IMU is a multi multi bagger, page-21585

I ducked over to the charting thread recently to check out what all the fuss was, and to see what fellow poster @slick was up to, and happened upon a post by an @AICp, which noted Looking at the timeline IMU presented, the storm isn't going to happen until later this year.......

I immediately thought to myself, if only markets operated that way. I’m not so sure the markets operate solely upon timelines. As an example last year during the gloom and doom of high inflation many were predicting the S&P to hit less than 4,000 at the years end. The Dow and Nasdaq were resigned to a similar fate, according to many analysts. Yet, as noted by me in earlier posts, during times when inflation starts falling (as began occurring at the time), markets outperform.

Why do markets outperform at a time when interest rates have been rising ad infinitum, when inflation has been running ramped and when everyone is betting on a recession?

Because markets are forward looking. They are anticipating a life beyond inflation, where higher rates decelerate growth, leading to a fall in inflation and ultimately a fall in interest rates. They look forward to a time when lowering interest rates lead to better margins and a return to company profit.

Back In 2022 the market fell off a cliff as investors perceived rates would increase, (as they eventually did), due to rising inflation. As jpmorgan.com notes the economic backdrop looked relatively healthy and resilient in 2022, with one particular (big) caveat: Inflation was pushing economy-wide prices higher at the fastest rate in over 40 years.The inflation problem and the Fed’s response to it (i.e., aggressive rate hikes in rapid succession) were at the root of 2022s market turmoil because of how investors at the time expected elevated interest rates would hinder economic activity moving forward. As it turned out, little more than a year later, when investors looked forward from 2023 to say 2025, they visualised falling interest rates, lower inflation, an increase in demand down the track and with it a return to good margins and company profits. Hence the market rose accordingly, despite all the doom and gloom. Once again when it comes to equity markets, it’s all about looking forward.

So what does this all have to do with Imugene, you may well ask?

I guess given the PD1 Vaxx, Vaxinia, Azer Cel and Oncarlytics results are due out later this year one would assume, as @AICp has, that Imugene may not pick up significantly until later in the year, when these results finally come to fruition. Unfortunately to do so may be a mistake, given the way markets operate. Obviously share price performance with Imugene is driven by clinical trial results. Upward momentum is possible if positive outcomes occur for the cancer patients they are treating. That said to date Imugene’s trials for PD1 Vaxx, Vaxinia, Oncarlytics (pre-clinically) and azer cel have produced nothing but positive signals, in a safe and low toxicity environment. So therefore to assume the current crop of trials would produce anything but sound results, would be to go against the grain, based upon recent history. Therefore one could reach the conclusion that later in 2024 the aforementioned Imugene trials could release enough positive data to warrant price appreciation for the stock.

The question then becomes is the market going to wait for the said data to arrive before acting?

IMO the market is not going to wait until later in 2024 to acquire IMU shares, for a number of reasons. These are:

1. Saul Priceman M.D., stated in late 2022, to myself and a handful of others in Sydney late in 2022 that it was his belief Big Pharma and others were and would be watching the Oncarlytics Phase 1 Trial with an eye to stepping up, in the early stages of the then forecast trial. Oncarlytics unique ability to identify, target, deliver and infect solid tumours, through its CD19 and CF33 combination was one he believed held extraordinary interest in the oncology sector. A drug bridging the gap between CAR T therapy for blood cancers, and, (with the addition of CD19/CF33), CAR T for solid tumour treatment, was one he insinuated would be too much for leading players to refuse. I either rightly or wrongly, reached the conclusion the pent up demand for such a therapy was one definitely not worth waiting for, as holding back and waiting may result in missing out on the next big thing,
2. Vaxinia already has FDA Fast Track designation and Priority Review status for one cancer indication. Early results in gastrointestinal patients within the existing MAST Trial would suggest one or two other indications may receive the same stamp of approval in 2024
3. Azer Cel is receiving support from the FDA, with Imugene’s manufacturing facility for the drug and ongoing trial for 10 patients producing all the right noises when it comes to regulatory approval for a registrational trial in 2025, and
4. The failure of Keytruda in several combination Phase 3 trials and the recent failure of Gilead's Trodelvy to meet its main goal in lung cancer trials, has IMO turned the spotlight toward the Professor Kaumaya invented Imugene licensed B cell vaccination, PD1 Vaxx, currently in a lung cancer trial with Roche’s Tercentiq.

If indeed markets are to follow their usual chain of events the aforementioned factors should induce action from institutional investors in the first half of 2024, as opposed to the latter half, (i.e., when in fact clinical trial results for Imugene’s drugs are actually realised). Once again my assumption is based on the premise markets tend to look forward, as opposed to looking to the present, when it comes to action.

AI - Revolution or Renaissance?

On another front the current AI innovation driving equity markets has the potential to revolutionise the way we perform business tasks.

As noted by britannica.com the Industrial Revolution transformed economies that had been based on agriculture and handicrafts into economies based on large-scale industry, mechanised manufacturing, and the factory system. New machines, new power sources, and new ways of organising work made existing industries more productive and efficient.

Is the current AI innovation set to deliver similar outcomes for work forces in the 21 century?

I suppose we must caution the AI momentum by forecasting outcomes that may not be all positive. The Industrial Revolution is renowned for creating jobs, the AI revolution, if we could call it that, may well shed jobs. Another less than attractive of the Industrial Revolution may be found in the notion it was a precursor to the age of the Robber Barons, a century later, in which the wealth of a few, such as Carnegie and Rockerfellow, controlled drastic economic outcomes for the masses. An age in which domineering monopolies and at times tyrannous price gouging proved detrimental to economic well being in a broader sense.

Safety and online security issues may well be an unwanted side effect of the current push toward AI.

So once again, What’s all this got to do with Imugene?

Perhaps nothing, you may well conclude. I was once lambasted on these threads for insinuating Imugene was akin to an AI stock, due IMO to the progressive nature of both its scientists and their science. Yet perhaps my personal thread may not have been to far from the truth. Imugene’s Professor Yuman Fong’s decision to employ robots when performing surgery is viewed as a significant step forward, in the eyes of his peers. Saul Priceman’s idea to use an antigen/target-armed CF33 OV, followed by treatment with CAR T cells directed against an antigen or solid tumour target, could in and of itself be seen as revolutionary. That is given CAR T therapy to date has only been somewhat successful in treating blood cancers, as opposed to the solid tumour treatment Oncarlytics promises. In a similar vein the creativity exercised by City of Hope scientists in inserting an nHIS transgene in cancer trial patient’s to monitor CF33’s movements within their body is next level, in my opinion. Just as is Professor Fongs notion his CF33 possesses memory like qualities, empowering it to recognise the reoccurrence of cancerous cells prior to infecting and attacking them once again, to kill them “once and for all,” as it were.

AI related or not, Imugene is performing some unique if not novel medical procedures to realise their goal of achieving positive outcomes for cancer patients.

Is the market going to assume these procedures equate to success in their existing clinical trials, and act now, as opposed to wait until later, in 2024?

Maybe Imugene’s lack of commercial, as opposed to medical outcomes, is what could be holding institutions back. The so called corner stone investors engaged through a capital raise at 30 cents some years back, appear to remain less than enthused don’t they, if indeed they are still around on the IMU Register. Whilst some of the company’s communication bungles have not added to their cause have they. How on earth in a presentation at the worlds leading biotech investment conference they could omit such relevant information as the FDA Fast Track Designation and Priority Review Status awarded to their flagship candidate Vaxinia, is beyond me. Perhaps there is a lot occurring behind the scenes we are unaware of. There may well be a method to their media madness, or should I say lack of it. As with the markets reaction to their forthcoming clinical trial results, I suppose all shall be revealed in the fullness of time.

DYOR Seek investment advice as and when required Opinions only