This change is based on feedback from initial target multinational companies, which have expressed a preference to prioritise their pipeline of innovative therapies or require further investment in clinical studies by Starpharma.
Translation - big pharma are not interested but hey interpret it however you like ? .... and you wonder why @sarge17 and I pointed out how AstraZeneca and Chase Sun were relegated to the "About Starpharma" section of ASX announcements prior to the Webinar ?
Four (4) big pharma companies currently have signed DEP® research agreements with Starpharma and have been 'researching' our tech for the last 3-9 years (Merck 4 yrs AstraZeneca 9 yrs Chase Sun 4 yrs Genentech 3 yrs) .... none of them have to date signed any DEP® / ADC license deals because IMO they haven't seen anything mind blowing in the science
AstraZeneca and Chase Sun have left the funnel / not researching anything DEP® related at present as advised in the webinar and Merck have committed up to $22 billion for ADCs elsewhere (Daiichi Sankyo) so I wouldn't hold my breath for further commitments to Starpharma off the back of that deal ? ...... but tell me again why Merck won't commit $ to Starpharma after 4 years of ADC 'research' if the science is so good ?
https://www.merck.com/news/daiichi-...laboration-for-three-daiichi-sankyo-dxd-adcs/
Merck to pay Daiichi Sankyo a $4 billion upfront payment in addition to $1.5 billion in continuation payments over the next 24 months, and may make additional payments of up to $16.5 billion contingent upon the achievement of future sales milestones, for a total potential consideration of up to $22 billion
As for Genentech .... well after 3 years you would think they would have advanced something (again) if they thought there was merit in the DEP® tech or if they saw something they liked but they haven't either to date ? Not sure that is a vote of confidence ?
All in all, it doesn't look good in Starpharma land as we head back to preclinical works with Medicxi with yet another classic Starpharma 'deal' that sees no $ paid directly to Starpharma from same..... all the hallmarks of desperation IMO and a portrayal of Starpharma negotiating from a position of weakness and certainly not one of strength backed by amazing DEP® science like so many claim on here - just sayin'
3....2...1.... "just sell then" - Don't worry we have been ..... we only have 500,000 shares left in this dog stock after selling that and more this FY at a loss to cover our FMG $23 per share profits from 2016 buys ... our remaining Starpharma holding is more than enough to make something back if we ever receive a takeover offer or Cheryl does sign something eventually but it doesn't mean I wont continue to point out the negatives in the interim ...... I notice everyone is on board with the constant ramping by some on here - it's just the people that point out the negative facts that are an issue .... funny that ..... Enjoy your day
