Couldn't agree more, PickEm.
What I can't get my head around ATM is the why the opportunity we (the market) are being offered isn't being reflected in the SP - IMO it's a bit like we've been asked to place a bet on the outcome of a test having the benefit of already peeking at the answer.
PAA has already conducted a (albeit fairly small and shorter) Phase II test with MPL in canines, which turned out like
this.
The issue was paletability, which took a really long time to resolve, but is now (reportedly) fixed.
So we are left with:
1. A drug with an outstanding and well-known safety profile in a Phase II trial that was already shown to be effective in a previous Phase II trial.
2. Reformulated to address poor paletability.
3. The reformulation process has made it 10x more potent.
4. Pre-clinical testing shows that the reformulated drug is still being absorbed and produces the same (key) metabolite.
5. Pre-clinical testing shows the drug is present at levels exceeding the target concentrations to achieve anticancer activity.
6. At 5x dosage (with no side-effects) the concentration in blood is 3x higher, allowing aggressive up-front treatment.
7. Pre-inked deal with a major pharma that can be exercised following positive results.
8. Significant positive cash-flow from a subsidiary.
9. Tight register (really tight)
10. Cash in the bank.
And this is before we consider the more speculative 'what future human trials might show'.
I understand that there is a risk with any biospec - maybe MPL wont work the same as a tablet, maybe it was chance that they saw the effect they did last time??
Of course all of this is IMO, DYOR etc. etc. but the derisking that has occurred thanks to the previous trials is huge and for the life of me I can't work out why we aren't trading in the mid 20c range.
