At this stage, I'd be happy to have a deal signed for any (other) indication to show there's interest in CYP's MSC manufacturing approach.
GvHD - I agree, it would be silly to sign a deal now, as it may potentially make it difficult to sign deals using our iPSC-MSCs in other indications using the same delivery method (IV infusions).
But after the multiple NDAs signed for DFU and us acquiring the plasma polymer technology from TekCyte when there was no need to do so at the time (with the remark that if our P1 is successful, the cost would likely be substantially higher), well, would have been an unnecessary and avoidable outgoing while we are awaiting any form of non-dilutive deal.
@Pierzzxx if interest in this space in general and CYP in particular, it mjght be worth your time to read this open access article in Nature, as it highlights why most of us here are invested and are still invested now, despite what you may consider a competing therapy recently being approved by the FDA (Mesoblast's Ryoncil in children with SR-aGvHD).
(20min delay)