Hey
@RBx thank you for the idea, here are some suggestions from my end in no particular order:
1) For me the message is getting clouded by too many shots on goal / too many disparate programs and an as such inability for the market to value the business. What needs to be presented is a more concise, distilled message that investors can get their head around. I would suggest the company develops an updated (institutional grade) investor presentation and that the next presentation includes slides on:
a) clear timeline of activities for each program
b) comparable transactions which have occurred in the market (include the recent Pfizer deal)
c) clinical schedule
d) pathway to potential commercialisation
I have provided example of these from another company I am invested in but you can find examples of these slides in many other listed biotech presos
2) Like
@zecs I believe the trial on LuPin has gone cold which has been disappointing. Likewise NOXCOVID. Management need to be seen to be delivering on promises and timelines. If the 'promise' of Novartis taking interest in Veyonda is not met by further follow up / activity or a void in communication, investors will start to question and form views in their own mind.
3) I think more needs to be done to explain the strategy around IP. Again, some will dismiss Veyonda when they figure out that idronoxil itself cannot be patented anymore on a composition of matter basis
4) A Board refresh - ie a material Board appointment with links to big pharma / biotech commercialisation.
5) Initiate broker research (Canaccord?) or someone like Chris Kallos at MST to prepare a research report (Chris is the biotech analyst there)
