Dr-Borehams-crucible-is-cynata-therapeutics-fujifilm-partnership-all-puff-and-no-blow, page-27

"Your suggestion:
"If he had the knowledge base to back it up Ross might say something like - in the event Fujifilm elects not to pursue the GvHD option in Japan with us it would seem that X, Y or Z might have the capabilities we need to partner with us in a) Japan or b) the world for GvHD specifically. He could even say that identifying X, Y or Z did not mean they were or were not in negotiations, that he only mentions it to show he knows there are potentially other options."

Are we only talking about the manufacturing side of it, licencing our product CYP-XXX or a combination of manufacturing and product licencing?"

All of it because they are related in my thesis. Control of future value (and CYPs share price) can at present be exerted through having a monopoly on manufacturing GvHD in Japan as readily as it can be controlled through intellectual property.

I believe Fujifilm is seeking to get more from its CYP deal than merely GvHD and suspect they intend to get more from the deal by holding up the best first best indication (GvHD in Japan) that can get to the clinic in the near future. I suspect they know that holding up GvHD to the clinic in Japan holds up the creation of value for CYP for all other indications because GvHD in Japan is the easiest fastest clinical proof of principle available.

So I believe anything Ross says that demonstrates he has sufficient knowledge of the players (potential competitors to Fujifilm both in Japan and in the world for GvHD so CYP-001 specifically) to put together an alternative to Fujifilm even in Japan for GvHD (with or without manufacturing - but a non-Fujifilm player would need a manufacturing capability of sufficient scale from somewhere) would be to the good.

I suspect the reason they were willing to get cute despite that they knew CYP could go elsewhere (if there was someone else to go to) is that they didn't believe Ross could find an alternative to them to take GvHD through phase 2 and into the clinic in Japan (and then on to the rest of the world) - so they'd been relying on their home ground advantage (in manufacturing as well) with Japanese regulators (who will care about Good Manufacturing Practice at scale).

As stated in a interview in 2016 (best example I could find) by Stewart Washer:
"TLSR: Is that a complex manufacturing process?
SW: Making MSCs is low tech, requiring only basic cell-culturing techniques. We can grow them in flasks, or even bags. The high-tech angle is the patented cell culture technique to turn the unlimited iPS cells into usable MSCs."
https://www.streetwisereports.com/article/2016/02/03/advanced-stem-cell-manufacture-saves-lives-and-prints-money-stewart-washer-of-cynata-therapeutics.html

I believe I understand what Stewart is saying there - but a manufacturing process can be both not complex but still be expensive to scale up because of the need to show GMP to a regulator when clinical cells are being produced.

Reading that, you would assume that any of the big bio CDMO/CMO should be capable to adapt the Cymerus technology. Here are a few links:
https://www.genengnews.com/a-lists/top-15-bioprocessing-companies/
https://www.pharma-iq.com/manufacturing/articles/top-10-medical-contract-manufacturing
https://www.outsourcing-pharma.com/Article/2018/10/22/Top-5-CDMOs-hold-15-of-the-market-as-industry-consolidation-is-expected-to-continue

I wouldn't assume that - not specifically in Japan and for GvHD (which I see as the world-first industry creating case). But I thank you for your good research links specifically the one from Stewart Washer and the first one above because they help understand or start with an understanding of the manufacturing space. I think the need for GMP and big scale will mean that those who can control the manufacturing space with their deep pockets and acquisition of available personell (and I believe Fuji have acquired or developed cell manufacturing patents) effectively can have a large influence on the future of regen even though they don't have the CYP patents.

Examples of licensing and T/O transactions have been provided in previous asx announcements and investor emails.

Bear in mind, FujiFilm, Hitachi, Asahi Glass, Mitsubishi, Samsung - they all came from a different industry and are now in the biotech sector.

I accept that - if any of those non-Fujifilm companies have an existing manufacturing presence in Japan I'd like Ross to be talking with or signalling the possibility of talking with them as alternatives (for GvHD in Japan then the world) to Fujifilm in the event that Fujifilm doesn't come to the table.