RAC (ASX) Ann: Race Board and Management Team Changes

Originally posted by JBeez_: ↑

I may also have been in the small minority that thought that the revised strategic plan was actually a positive for the company. As others have mentioned, the possibility of raising funds and subsequent dilution I viewed as a necessary evil, and pharma development and extending timlines are a pretty iconic duo. On a personal note, any dilution wouldn't have a material impact on my holdings anyway as I'm a relatively small fish. I certainly understand that there may have been some loud voices concerned with any dilution given the size of their holdings, but I've always thought RAC has done a great job with dilution given some other aussie biotechs seem content with adding billions of shares to the register each year.

Again, I largely agreed with the revised strategic update as it began to look more like commercialisation paths that I'm familiar with from pharma MNCs and more established biotechs. The mBC trial made sense on the advice of KOLs and targeting this segment of the BC market seemed to make logical sense with the ambition for extension into early breast cancer after positive mBC trial readouts again a common path. Given anthracyclines remain the SoC in this cohort, and PFC of 6months + OS of 15-20 months there was certainly the potential to show a meaningful clinical outcome with bisantrene use. Perhaps there was some concerns re recruitment given the presentation also calls out that 80% of mBC patients have already exceeded lifetime exposure to anthracyclines?

Regarding AML trial, changing the combinations made sense as to more closely reflect current treatment algorithms. I liked the idea of exploring synergy with venetoclax and azacitidine based on guidance that these are the current SoC.

Overall I was happy with the logic behind and the design of the new strategic update.

I'm a bit lost following the recent events, I was happy with DCBs performance and thought that the movements in the SP were largely due to factors outside his control. I, like many am of course happy to see DT back involved with the company given his substantial holdings and alignment with SHs. I can't really work out what happened, pushing timelines out to 2028 is not something you would do if you were looking for a quick transaction. I thought we were closer than ever to bringing a partner on board, and would have been happy to see the global rights to bisantrene given to a big pharma in return for upfronts and milestones that could have been then used to amp up discovery of further FTO agents to expand our pipeline.

The strategy of witholding information from investors such that its scientific impact could be maximised again was something I was onboard with. I don't need to be handheld through the process, constant drip feeding of information may have helped the SP in the meantime but I've been on record as saying the daily SP movements are inconsequential to me and the end goal is my only focus, if there was concern the board and management were unable to deliver on this I would have been out long ago. Of course there was the possibility of a lowball takeover but I cant see SHs voting in favour of such thing in reality. Perhaps there was disagreement with the indications that were chosen as a focus but why comission Triangle to look at BC if it wasnt a focus?

As for next moves who knows. I'm not sure I see anything inherently wrong with the path set out by the previous board and DCB and I worry about what message another overhaul sends to investors and potential partners. At this stage I just want to see RC220 developed and in the arms of the people who need it most. I'd rather see management pick a path and get on with it, forget the back room arguments and revolving door management policy.

Expand

Great post...

I always get confused when people state timelines were extended. My response is, did they?

In reality we were just given a clear path which showed realistic timelines. RAC haven't dosed a single patient as yet. We don't have any current trials. So what timelines were extended? I'm certain any new proposed strategies will have similar timelines to what the strategic update had.

No.	Vol.	Price($)
2	7790	$1.66

No.

Vol.

Price($)

7790

$1.66

Price($)	Vol.	No.
$1.68	100	1

Price($)

Vol.

No.

$1.68

100

No.	Vol.	Price($)
2	7790	1.655
2	6835	1.650
1	40000	1.640
4	10743	1.635
3	12098	1.630

No.

Vol.

Price($)

7790

1.655

6835

1.650

40000

1.640

10743

1.635

12098

1.630

Price($)	Vol.	No.
1.680	100	1
1.685	3597	1
1.690	2506	2
1.700	11500	1
1.725	604	1

Price($)

Vol.

No.

1.680

100

1.685

3597

1.690

2506

1.700

11500

1.725

604

(20min delay)
Last $1.67		Change -0.025(1.48%)		Mkt cap ! $282.0M

Open	High	Low	Value	Volume
$1.69	$1.69	$1.65	$142.9K	85.93K

Ann: Race Board and Management Team Changes, page-344

Actinogen Medical ramps up Alzheimer’s treatment trials, targeting fast-track global approvals

Recce eyes Indonesia for novel anti-infective as Indo-Aus ties grow stronger

Chariot Corp unveils plans for Black Mountain "pilot mine" in Wyoming, US; shares jump +20%

Firefly positioned for copper growth in Canada ahead of resource update

Coda Minerals (ASX:COD) enters rights issue to further exploration in South Australia

Featured News

Buyers (Bids)

Sellers (Offers)

Featured News

Ann: Race Board and Management Team Changes, page-344

Top Stories

Actinogen Medical ramps up Alzheimer’s treatment trials, targeting fast-track global approvals

Recce eyes Indonesia for novel anti-infective as Indo-Aus ties grow stronger

Chariot Corp unveils plans for Black Mountain "pilot mine" in Wyoming, US; shares jump +20%

Firefly positioned for copper growth in Canada ahead of resource update

Coda Minerals (ASX:COD) enters rights issue to further exploration in South Australia

Featured News

Buyers (Bids)

Sellers (Offers)

Featured News