A change is as good as a holiday, by WMHB
Given the current discontent held by many existing IMU shareholders, the BOD of Imugene could be seen as being extremely brave in asking for any form of remunerative advancement(s). Though placing questions surrounding remuneration aside, Imugene’s AGM next week could be an opportunity for change, if shareholders choose to call on their own vision, when it comes to divining the company’s direction and strategy. I for one believe embracing change can be a good thing. Perhaps now the company is at a point where change should be viewed as not only progressive, but necessary. I note company Chair Paul Hopper has performed the remarkable task of adding value to his initial shareholders, whilst at the same time assembling a platform of contemporary if not state of the art treatment arms. Not to mention overseeing an impressive personnel recruitment phase, capable of bringing his game changing medicine to fruition. But that said having spent ten years in the chair, with multiple other business interests to pursue, it could be in his best interests to step aside and let some new, motivated, fresh blood assume the role for the forthcoming decade. A Chairperson with an eye on the broader US market, as opposed to multiple local capital raises with the ever present Bell Potter, at significant discount to the intrinsic value of the company’s IP, could be a good place to start. Someone who is a big wheel in either OV, Car T, the oncology space in general, or even the world of finance, could herald in a new era for IMU, as she seeks to establish the pre eminence worthy of her brand. Someone prepared to stand up and be counted fairly and squarely in the media eye, as and when required.
I can’t help but think despite the development of Oncarlytics, Vaxinia and now Azer Cel, something needs to change. Recently I have written of Baker Bothers, the leading biotech fund manager, and their pursuit of Replimune, a competitor to Vaxinia in the oncolytic virus space. Or of Pfizer’s pursuit and eventual term sheet with Allogene, David Chang’s allogenic therapy start up. In doing so I feel Imugene may have missed the opportunity to capitalise on their next level, safe and innovative immunotherapy, on more than one occasion now. At the same time business and financial staff have been paid not only good salaries, but additional bonuses, when from the naked eye KPI’s have not been reached. No-one is begrudging paying wages commensurate with industry standards to attract the cream of the crop, but at the end of the day it’s all about results. From a financial perspective, irrespective of the science in play, those results have not been forthcoming, under the guise of the existing Chair, CFO, financial directors and Imugene management.
It’s difficult for Leslie Chong, IMU CEO and MD to be across all sections of the business, when her science background calls her to not only trust the science, but deliver it. To blame her for all and sundry when it comes to recent share price performance, or indeed to deny her additional options in IMU, would be in my opinion unreasonable. Yet it could be time for her to benefit from the input of a new Chairperson, one with a fresh face and outlook on all things Imugene, including the pathway to commercialisation, the ongoing development of Vaxinia and the cultivation of talents such as Professors Fong, Kaumaya and Priceman M.D. Someone completely focused on Imugene, without a contingent of intertwined at times competing business interests. karenmccullough.com in her article “Change-in-the-workplace-a-guide-for-companies” argues Change in an organization leads to many positive aspects – that lead to retaining a competitive edge and also remaining relevant in your business area. Change encourages innovation, develops skills, develops staff and leads to better business opportunities, and improves staff morale.
Ten years is a long time in the saddle, in anyones language. Paul Hopper has earned the right to be a leading shareholder in the company he founded, Imugene. He has earned the right to stay on in the Board of Directors, if he sees it necessary to do so. But it’s all looking somewhat repetitive, stale if not uninspiring at present, with many shareholders unsure of the road map ahead. Questions are continually being asked of the company’s B cell platform, with communication being all but absent on that front. For whatever reason company management have been unable to attract significant corporate interest outside of a few attractively priced capital raises, that could or may well have been postponed. Well-intentioned as they were, a means to a definite end in all circumstances, one could hardly argue they created share price appreciation for the owners of the company (I.e., the shareholders). There have been no caveats placed on incoming majority shareholders. There has been little or no regard for company loyalty as capital raise participants, eager to etch out monetary gain as opposed to over the long term remain, have come and gone somewhat surreptitiously, if the truth be known.
It doesn’t need to be a dramatic event, akin to “Mutiny on the Bounty,” simply a changing of the guard, with a view to enhancing the next decade of Imugene’s development. Hopper making the decision to stand aside could be viewed as the next step in the evolution of a company toward viewing the world from a macro perspective, as opposed to living within the microcosm that is the ASX. When it comes to Imugene there is much to look forward to. Perhaps now is the ideal time to capitalise on the opportunities that lay ahead, through the replenishment of corporate flexibility and strategy. A Chairperson with no allegiance to the existing board, personnel and corporate players, could effect the change needed to ignite and propel Imugene toward the biotech stratosphere.
DYOR Opinions only
(20min delay)