MSB (ASX) CHF trial mythbusting

Originally posted by dolcevita ↑

Seriously, you're like a dog with a bone on this. Points for effort though...

Teva set up the trial in such a way as they could review the surrogate endpoints at the interim stage, and walk only if the data was poor. Upon reviewing the data, they walked.

This is the only explanation I can find that fits all the facts.

You're ignoring at least several key facts and also you overlook that you're speculating, and in doing so we have to look at what is more probable, given commercial realities.

It is a fact that commercial priorities have changed for Teva.

Teva have had a seismic cultural shift from aggressively being involved in clinical trials (including being front and centre of MSB's) to generic drugs which do not require any.

Like all companies they want to square off the books pre end of financial year and explain their strategy. There is plenty of indication that Teva is closing the books on anything non-generic with overhang. It's not that Teva can't afford to continue the trials (that would be absurd), it's a question of management decisions consistent with their forward vision.

You think that one term in a contract will be definitive over all events? You have the dog wagging the tail. A contract is meant to represents the intentions of the parties. It doesn't override them if they are in mutual agreement to vary it so that it does reflect renewed intentions based on commercial decisions.

I have pointed this early on, and many others keep pointing out to you but you refuse to take the implications on board. It's a fact that it's open to the parties to negotiate but you act as if the only explanation is that Teva has exercised a termination clause. But not all the evidence stacks up that way.

Contracts don't compel the parties to go a particular way if each agree not to do so. It would be a rare contract that did not have a variation clause, and even without one, it can be implied. I have never seen a contract that states that it cannot be varied by agreement between the parties.

Your post is a clear thinking quagmire.

Just to focus again on the key issue and going with some of your assumptions: supposing that Teva had wanted to walk due to what you claim is poor data and can then press the termination trigger.

- Why would they gift MSB with the IP back with no requirement of consideration for the IP, when according to you, they have terminated for MSB's non fulfilment of key targets?Surely they haven't suddenly become overwhelmed to make gifts?

- Are you saying that the IP is worthless? That can't be right. Because the FDA Committee has approved continuation of the clinical trials, so efficacy must not be a problem as far as they're concerned so despite your speculations based on what you see in the contract, there is no indication that the IP is suddenly worthless. Far from it.

You have ruled out recruitment issues (rightly so, I TU'd you for that). There are other reasons why recruitment will speed up and this is contained in the new identification of damaged tissue and catheter-based delivery system.

Just to be clear because you keep skipping over this point:

There is nothing to say that interim review meant the data enabled Teva to trigger a unilateral right of termination.
What we have is a convergence of events with the end of the financial year approaching.

Your view of events is neither complete nor correct. Please step back and see the logical errors in your assumptions.

Wood and ducks.

Expand

Teva was bound by the terms of the contract .If as you say it didn't suit their commercial model ,so what .Unless this was one of the reasons they could void the contract .

Surely Silvio would not have agreed under such conditions if they were still contractually obligated .

No.	Vol.	Price($)
9	97231	96.0¢

No.

Vol.

Price($)

97231

96.0¢

Price($)	Vol.	No.
96.5¢	83352	29

Price($)

Vol.

No.

96.5¢

83352

No.	Vol.	Price($)
10	104609	0.960
12	280721	0.955
31	361376	0.950
16	240691	0.945
22	268780	0.940

No.

Vol.

Price($)

104609

0.960

280721

0.955

361376

0.950

240691

0.945

268780

0.940

Price($)	Vol.	No.
0.965	80224	27
0.970	172381	16
0.975	80834	10
0.980	58658	7
0.985	44551	6

Price($)

Vol.

No.

0.965

80224

0.970

172381

0.975

80834

0.980

58658

0.985

44551

(20min delay)
Last 96.0¢		Change -0.045(4.48%)		Mkt cap ! $1.096B

Open	High	Low	Value	Volume
$1.00	$1.01	94.0¢	$5.628M	5.821M

CHF trial mythbusting, page-7

Grosvenor mine fire takes another scalp as Metarock's 168-person presence on-site suspended by Anglo

The Calmer Co CEO Anthony Noble on what lies ahead in FY25

Mineral Commodities to shut down Tormin mineral sands project as oil spill contaminates beach

Koba, formerly a cobalt player, gears up to become newest explorer in the uranium state: South Australia

Eagle Mountain scents a porphyry with high-grade Au-Ag-Pb results in Arizona

Featured News

Buyers (Bids)

Sellers (Offers)

Featured News

CHF trial mythbusting, page-7

Top Stories

Grosvenor mine fire takes another scalp as Metarock's 168-person presence on-site suspended by Anglo

The Calmer Co CEO Anthony Noble on what lies ahead in FY25

Mineral Commodities to shut down Tormin mineral sands project as oil spill contaminates beach

Koba, formerly a cobalt player, gears up to become newest explorer in the uranium state: South Australia

Eagle Mountain scents a porphyry with high-grade Au-Ag-Pb results in Arizona

Featured News

Buyers (Bids)

Sellers (Offers)

Featured News