Quoting our old friend Bioexec -
"hopefully Paul goes back to academia where he belongs (he is a follow the next hot idea guy or has a new idea every couple of years but never finishes the past one, great for grant writing, but terrible for biotech....and I believe this is why PYC has changed strategies so often over the years). "
https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/la...2696159/page-56?post_id=17075419#.Wk2-9tHZWhA
Paul is now in the right spot for PYC - assisting with the discovery/research/academia/grant writing area. The strategy that you rightly say has come and gone is now set on the platform first - then the unicorns.
Unfortunately Richard moved on but I gather the circumstances at the time were such that this made sense - I did meet with him late last year when I was in Perth and he was continuing to hold 95-100% of his shares and liked the direction the company was taking.
The new team are in and have had their feet under the desk for long enough to have made an initial impact. Feb is about the 6 month point which is a good time to assess how they are performing and Aug/Oct is a year and they will have had to face up to funding 2019 which will be a crucial assessment period. Hopefully they will have demonstrated their worth already and that will be an easy assesment.
Funding 4-5 years ago was hard for PYC so they made some tough (poor?) choices but the last 2 capital raises have been relatively easy and there has been on market buying that has moved the price 2x or 3x depending on your starting point. You can't fault the board for their choice to take the least dilutive cr I've seen in a while last year for the $5m at market - it wouldn't surprise me if other parties have approached the company for placements in the past 12 months.
Still - if the science don't work - none of this matters.
(20min delay)