Agree with your recent leaning HT - It is something I posted...

Agree with your recent leaning HT - It is something I posted about recently and the more I think about it, the more I think it makes sense.

I would personally prefer a juicy TO ($15B USD) but I suspect that we might just partner with a Blackstone etc. It was not a coincidence in my mind that they were referenced in an article with Jeffries in the Australian recently.

In my musings on the issue, I did wonder whether they may receive funding from Blackstone (or the like) that would enable them to acquire a small Pharma with a more established and global presence to progress the drug themselves and leverage the existing Pharma's infrastructure and possibly staff. That would enable a rapid expansion/escalation and would maximise shareholder return.

One thing that struck me yesterday and does colour my leaning further in this direction is the way Jon speaks about the future. Most CEO's would be upbeat and pubilcly open to the idea of corporate activity. It could be my read only, but it seemed to me that he is almost not and rather than saying No, is instead saying he the company agnostic. I get the impression that there may be an element here of broader management wanting to create a legacy that will rival (and likely surpass) CSL in circa 10 years as the biggest Australian pharma.

This also possibly explains Trevor's sale last year as someone advanced in age. Happy to take a decent chunk off the table and enjoy his life, knowing that Neuren is playing the longer game here (unless a truly stellar TO offer is presented).

Call me crazy!