I agree. BVF is an activist fund. They take big stakes then...

I agree. BVF is an activist fund. They take big stakes then agitate to get the board and management to deliver.
I think they see value in the technology.
The company's claims of 'transformational funding' needs to be read as transformational for the medium term employment security of management.
I don't think BVF see it that way. Which is ironic.
They will push for a deal. They will help find partners.
I'm suspect that most trials VLA conduct from this point on will not add much to their value. But they will add delay and take the fizz off.
They compare themselves to Biovex. Thing is, Biovex did the right thing by their shareholders and did a deal with Amgen at the right time for the right money.
It remains to be seen if Viralytics is a typical Australian biotech: holding on too long, too slow in getting trials away, watching the waves of interest pass by, never really engaging with partners, until competitors or science render them worthless. In the meantime collecting good salaries, but delivering no shareholder returns.
VLA has delivered nothing for shareholders for a long time.
BVF at nearly 15% will have plenty to say about the old approach. They can speak for me anyday.

I didn't get to the AGM where I would have put my concerns to them. If anyone did, appreciate a post.