Agree the report overall was good and I should have made the point that the 'screaming validation' was meant to be relative to the one Bioshares pointed out. PYC directly received US$2m as opposed to indirectly receiving $750k spread over 4 years.
I know you prefer to take a counter view to my posts but do you really not see my point? Can you really see why they maybe chose not to mention Genetech at all? The article is referring to a 200% increase in the SP that started last Dec - do you really think that mentioning the grant to our collaborators and the largest every payment PYC has received from a big pharma related company was not even worth mentioning?
The cash alone is what is giving us the extra timeline this year to deliver the iMYC data and not be constantly talking capital raises but the fact that a company like Genetech thought it wise to pay US$2m to extend their agreement is some sort of validation and relative to a 4 year grant of 1/4 the size that doesn't even go directly to PYC . . . . Well I call that screaming out to an analyst that it is worthy of a mention. The next payment on that deal is probably a year to 18 months away but if successful it should be US$5-10m based on the broad parameters RH indicated last year.
It was great that Bioshares noticed the focussed company strategy though - I do agree that it has contributed to people re-rating the potential of PYC. FOr the first time in many years there are quite a few people with it back on their watch list and as they continue to kick goals the value should continue to be realised. I am a little nervous about chasing MYC - it is a holy grail with a degree of difficulty 9.9 so pursuing the other leads is an important diversifyer but if they do manage to get an impressive data pack together later this year on MYC then the Genetech deal will turning out to be whimpering validation in comparison.
(20min delay)