This is the concern:
" Clarity’s products continue to generate exciting data andprogress through clinical development with substantialmomentum, but unfortunately our share price has beensignificantly affected by a number of events external to the Company since the US Presidential election inNovember 2024. These include a fall of over 30% in theXBI (US Biotech Index) from its peak in November 2024 toits low in April 2025, corrections in global market indices,including the S&P500 and NASDAQ in the US, as well as the All Ordinaries and the ASX200 in Australia; changeswithin the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA); globaltariff and trade war concerns and the collapse of Optheain the local market."
Just a blanket refusal to accept that the company has contributed to its plight in any way. The XBI, S&P500, NASDAQ, All Ordinaries and ASX200 are all stock market indices. A large part of why they have come down is due to the tariff and trade war concern. So six of the "external issues" negatively affecting Clarity, is really just one issue. Lets give Clarity the benefit of blaming the most significant of these indexes - XBI. On this basis, it can reasonably legitimately blame a 30% SP decline. Don't agree that Opthea bears any responsibility. It doesn't operate in a remotely similar space, so its a bit of a stretch to blame any of Clarity's SP performance on Opthea. And somehow the indices were all irrelevant when Clarity went on its 700% SP run.
By far and away the biggest contributor to Clarity's demise has been the (slow and slowing) speed of its trials, and the blowout to result reporting timeframes. This directly impacts capital (in)adequacy - hence its become a shorter target.
The refusal to accept that this has nothing to do with events external is disappointing. It also tends to impact retail holders (who are more likely to believe / accept positive spin from management) more than professional investors (who can spot capital inadequacy from a long way off).
This is all a bit academic now. Clarity's commercial situation has become somewhat binary (that's it's commercial situation, not its scientific situation - and for avoidance of doubt, positive scientific progress and commercial success can be mutually exclusive - ask just about any listed Aussie biotech).
For the Bulls - Clarity will announce material positive outcomes for at least one and up to all of SECURE, CO-PSMA, CLARIFY and AMPLIFY prior to the capital raise. This will boost the SP which will get a further turbo boost from closing shorts. On this basis, the capraise could be done at a significant premium to today's price.
For the Bears - there will be no meaningful trial updates prior to the capraise, the SP will wend its way down as more in the market realise, shorts will continue to increase and the capraise could be done at a significant discount to today's price (which would be Clarity's first raise done at a lower price to the previous one with the resultant shine off the company and its management).
My 2c, is that its only Co-PSMA that can help Bulls. SECURE is slow by virtue of being a therapy trial. AMPLIFY - which was expected to start in H1-2025, has now slipped into the "in coming months" basket, so is likely several months off commencing. It would therefore be unlikely to report results prior to pulling the capraise trigger and CLARIFY is not expected to report before AMPLIFY. Go Professor Emmett!
PS: there's an irony in blaming external events on the one hand and then doing a "deep dive" to find an external event (ie another company with three FTD's for a product) in an attempt to secure some reflected glory. On such a dive one might have encountered a number of products that received FTD that have been discontinued or failed trials. One may not even have to leave the surface to find products with multiple Priority Review Vouchers that have been discontinued ...
Expand
(20min delay)