"While I understand, many investor's don't really understand the importance of manufacturing, the whole Bio - Sector will catch on, the significance of what C.Y.P. has to offer."
I accept your premise and agree with you that "many investor's don't really understand the importance of manufacturing".
But I'd like to add that the sorts of potential partners that CYP would hope would in future partner with them on the development of some indications are going to better understand the importance of manufacturing to cell and cell-free based medicines than many retail investors and that also some retail investors probably don't understand the importance of manufacturing quite as well as they think they do.
In my understanding manufacturing is important for MSC-based cell medicine manufacturing in two clear ways - (1) the quality of the product can be determined by the manufacturing and by the quality of the cells that are started with (a medicinal cell product needs to be effective (potent) - that's the issue at present between the FDA and MSB. And (2), and this only matters when (1) is assured, the cost of the effective product can be greatly influenced by its manufacturing and cost is almost always a driver in the commercial viability of medicines.
In the past CYP has made arguments - put communications intended to be informative and intended to be persuasive - about both those ways in which manufacturing is important presumably because Ross and his team believe that is how Cymerus can add value to the manufacturing.
But, and here is where I want to refer to the italics part or what you wrote - "the whole Bio -Sector will catch on" is not necessarily true in any sort of meaningful time frame if the management of the company cannot communicate effectively and persuasively - because the whole Bio-Sector has other things potentially competing for its attention and there are claims being made - some of which I personally find very credible - that manufacturing can be improved that have nothing at all to do with Cymerus. 3D manufacturing would definately help and CYP can't offer 3D at this stage - it hasn't even reported a proof in principle demostration of 3D manufacturing - which should be possible at about a 5 to 10 litre bioreactor scale - so absent that CYP is only talking about a part of manufacturing at industrial scale rather than the whole manufacturing at industrial scale.
In my opinion, CYP does not communicate effectively and persuasively (we just lost Fujifilm which was pretty much our only partner on an indication after many many years of Ross's communication efforts) that Cymerus is (potentially) an important part of manufacturing on the aspects of producing a quality, effective product or that it can be a cost effective way of producing MSC cell based medicines.
I completely agree with your premise that manufacturing is important and that many investors don't understand. But some of them do - big pharma understands the importance of getting manufacturing costs down very very well. It speaks directly to their ultimate profitability to be able to get costs down. Temcell it seems sells at a high price in Japan right now. Fujifilm is a japanese company. So big pharma would be very aware - they are just not at this stage being persuaded by Ross and his management teams communications that Cymerus is something they need to be interested in at this time. Fuji it seems is happy to remain in on the production of cells to customers that want to buy cells - that is a very safe business and Fuji can potentially produce a lot of cells with a lot of methods using the same sort of facilities as they'd construct to produce industrial quantities of MSC cells-
But if anyone IS interested in the Cymerus process - anyone who is a potential investor either at the retail level or at the level of say Fidelity or BioScience Managers (not those institutions but others like them) and they get their interest tweeked perhaps by a presentation or perhaps by a tweet and they follow the links back to find out more what they actually see is out of date information that in stating Fujifilm has a license is wrong information - and that I submit looks poor and is poor. And that is something that is very much in the company's - Ross's control.
Your post was constructive. My response to your post is constructive. If you help CYP communicate better (simply by removing the things that are wrong in their existing communications) then that is you being constructive in your feedback to them.
I logged in to see if you'd ticked my post - which was constructive and relevant to yours. You hadn't.
CYP Price at posting:
39.0¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)