Why IMU is a multi multi bagger, page-19999

Maybe so. But what's the value proposition? Does the license agreement with YF prohibit certain drug usage, or indeed partnerships? What does the company anticipate the market price to patients being for a dose of Vaxinia (in USD). Is the goal to out license the drug to multiple end users, or accept a lump sum upfront and milestone payments down the track form one? Could rights to only 20% of the drug be sold to a manufacturing and marketing partner, leaving Imugene to maintain ownership of the remaining 80%? Or is an outright sale of the drug what is hoped for? If so how does the company envisage the Oncarlytics arm playing out from a financial perspective? Is it a part of the package, or an ancillary gift to the potential acquirer? Is there a license agreement in place between CF33/Vaxinia and Oncarlytics? What commercial agreement is in place between Arovella/CF33 and Oncarlytics? Or is that too in the wait and see basket?

The same could be said for Azer Cel. It too is a great product with massive scope in the relapse market. Imugene is pinning their hopes on a registration trial for their newly acquired allogeneic therapy. But what is the cost to manufacture that drug? What is the anticipated sale price for the drug? What is the forecast market penetration and market size for the drug?

What’s most important is the value proposition. The combination of pricing, positioning, product quality, reputation, all relative to the competing options available in the market. It all comes back to the overall value that the investor perceives they are getting.

Whether we like it or not MS and his team of business colleagues have delivered little in the way of significant institutional investors (i.e., Baker Brothers) to the Imugene register. If you keep doing the same thing, you're sure to keep getting the same results. Slide after slide, positive announcement after positive announcement has failed to secure leading biotech investors onto the register. Imugene is making headway on the science front, but they need to mix it up a bit on the commercial front. Sitting back and resting on product laurels was okay back in the 50's, but as Elon Musk recently found out, it doesn't matter how good your product is, you need to sell it.

Apologies if I am sounding negative. As many are aware I am excited if not ecstatic at the progression of the Vaxinia trial, together with the recent FDA acknowledgement for the product. But let me ask you this question? How would like it if someone else recognised how good the product was and it subsequently sold as many drugs do, for a 300% premium to the prevailing share price, if that?

I for one would have wished commercially speaking that more had been done to propel the existing SP to levels that reflected the intrinsic value of the product and IP in the first place.

DYOR