Over the years that I have been watching and accumulating PYC shares I have been impressed with the story around the science, but never really understood it fully. How could I, I am not a scientist... I've actually asked some biologists and research scientists I know to have a look over it, and they say that it looks 'interesting' but until you really get under the hood and tinker around you're never really going to know for sure.
So, I've relied on the story coming out of management and the notion that pharma companies know what they're doing and would not pay PYC anything unless there was merit to the story. Then there is the story from mgt around the fact they have achieved 100% success in all their endeavours. May not be the smartest way to invest, but this is a spec stock so it is what it is...
So, to my unscientific mind it LOOKS good, but is it really...?
I've been thinking about this a bit because I am becoming increasingly concerned that not one of the existing relationships has yet extended to the next phase. Why not? If they did what they wanted and it worked so well, then it would be a simple matter of moving forward? But not one has !!
If the science was that compelling, then why wouldn't EVERY pharma that wants to generate a new pipeline of drugs want to work with PYC? Not with standing the nuances of doing deals with pharma, the problems in the industry, etc... IF the science is so compelling surely PYC could have / should have bedded down some new deals. So why haven't they? I know they are saying it's tough to do deals, but...?
Is it more a case of PYC is too small, pharma are trying to squeeze them to pick it up cheaper or waiting till the IP expires?
I don't know, but is anyone willing to put forward thoughts either way?
PYC Price at posting:
2.2¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)