Thanks for posting. I was watching this at a place I consult...

Thanks for posting. I was watching this at a place I consult yesterday and someone peeked over my shoulder and asked

“What’s that all about?”

I suggested I show them at lunch. Then at lunch five of us, two accountants and two building and trade related employees watched it with me. It was interesting to have some non investors, but investors nonetheless with me, for a second opinion as it were. Sometimes I’m accused of having rose coloured glasses when it comes to Imugene.

In my opinion LC gave a solid account of herself when relaying to Small Cap viewers the effect both Azer Cel and thereafter Imugene’s oncolytic virus have on a cancer patients body. Statistically speaking she may well have outlined numbers associated with cancer diagnosis on a per annum basis, if not Calendar Average Growth Rates (CAGR) in the disease to give listeners some concept of the veracity of the disease, but here description of these drugs was well placed.

I guess as many of us have noted in the past it is relevant to point out the drugs have been successful in curing one or two patients as noted in the interview. But to the naked eye the viewer may be left wondering, “Well is it one or two out of one hundred patients, or two hundred? How successful are these drugs actually?” Probably more to the point when asked why the so called Mum and Dad investors should invest in Imugene LC refers to such phrases as “We have this beautiful opportunity to partner with Big Pharma,” or “We are going to take these drugs as far as we can”. Many I am sure would be left asking “What does that mean?” And perhaps “What are the costs involved?” Or “What is the potential market size for one of these drugs in terms of dollars?” Many would be trying to ascertain “What is the potential return on investment?”

When asked is this perhaps a world first she states that Azer Cel has the potential to be a world first, which could lead the audience to the conclusion that Imugene’s other drugs are maybe not world first. That there are multiple competitors. That, maybe what Imugene possess is “run of the mill,” and that many other companies have or are striving to do the same thing. Yet we know from our research a drug such as Vaxinia is unique, is a market leader and groundbreaking in the sense it is treating patients with solid tumours, a market segment accounting for up to 90% of all cancer diagnosis, many of which are currently untreatable. A market with a size of hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars on offer.

Social workers suggest you need to start where the patient is at. The same applies for your audience. I would assume that like my work colleagues yesterday and the interviewer at Small Caps, the audiences scientific knowledge is limited. Yet whilst it is important to broaden their knowledge in explanation of your product range, let’s face it, the majority are tuning in to gauge what they can invest in. To what stocks for them may represent a sound investment opportunity. For my way of thinking the product is a very small part of that equation. Let me give you a work example one of my colleagues gave me. They said that pretend they were listening to the CEO and Managing Director of a company they buy from, Dulux, discussing his business as an investment opportunity. They said say he suggested a new paint was being trialled that never peels, irrespective of our harsh Australian climate. It never chips, fades or strips off after say 30 years. Now as an investor they suggest they would be more interested in the potential market size for the paint, the estimated sale price and the prospective return, than on the ingredients utilised to make the paint. They note they would be interested in whether any other companies, say British Paints, or others, were looking or had already produced such a paint. Was this going to be a good return on investment, I think many would be asking themselves, as opposed to how good the paint was. Similarly with mature investments, such as say Tesla, the accountant went on to mention. “What is the competition? The prospective market size for electric vehicles? The price points? The prospect of market penetration for their motor vehicles?” They said they’d like to know those facts before they invested.

I myself am fortunate enough to understand the science presented in this interview. I comprehend the fact LC has a sound product knowledge. But from an objective, as opposed to subjective perspective, I would believe the majority of would be investors could reach the conclusion Imugene is a Research and Development company, which may or may not be a good investment depending on how some of their drugs perform down the track. They may well conclude “Well I don’t really know what that means in terms of a dollar value or return. Maybe it could be quite good if these pivot, or registration trials, whatever they are, come to fruition”. I’m sounding negative aren’t I, but I have to be honest in saying that’s where the majority of viewers would end up, in my opinion. That is if they even stayed on to listen to the investment questions pose toward the end of the 19 minute interview.

Unfortunately I believe the message isn’t cutting through to those Mum and Dad investors. At a stock price of 10 cents today, given the length, breadth and potential of Imugene’s pipeline, not to mention their ”already banked” clinical trial successes, one would have to assume that’s the case. I wish it wasn’t so. I wish the interview led to a flurry of investment dollars. That the Small Caps broadcast enticed millions of dollars in investment today on the ASX. That Mum’s and Dad’s saw the opportunity to invest in Imugene as exhilarating as investing in the next property they were looking at, their next investment unit. If only that were the result… Needless to say the cynic may well remark that despite appearing on programs such as Small Caps, or ASX today, or whatever it is, Imugene perhaps are not, nor ever have been chasing the investment dollar. As Chairman Paul hopper has stated previously at investor luncheons, ”It’s not our job to sell shares in our company to you”.

If we take that on board and play it out I suppose the end game for Imugene is to produce the results, put the runs on the board, and attract the Big Fish Big Pharma to earn the ultimate prize, big dollars. Irrespective of the share price in the meantime, on the way through as it were. Maybe like many long term followers or investors in the stock I have become immune myself to the fact that is the company’s ultimate goal, and that all these interviews are really not going to move the dial that much, if at all. For they don’t really reveal that much, from an investment point of view. Unless that is you are prepared to delve a little deeper into the science, which most people aren’t. If the truth be known most investors don’t have either the time nor inclination to do that much research. It all becomes a little too hard, as in this instance I’m sure it has been, for many that is. It’s interesting isn’t it, some on these threads have scoffed at the headline in the British newspapers recently, “First bowel cancer vaccine could be available in two years as NHS doctors trial the jab.” But I’m confident these headlines would capture more eyeballs than the aforementioned Small Caps interview.

Would Imugene ever release such a headline with respect to any of their products? I’ll let you be the judge. But in short the answer is no. What if their PR department had blogs on their website with headlines like “ Imugene’s Oncolytic Virus set to be a leader in a market worth hundreds of billions of dollars,” Or “Meet Jasper xx, read about how he survived for three years having been given three months to live.” What about an article like “With many autologous CAR T’s under scrutiny from the FDA, is Imugene’s Azer Cel set to reap the benefits in a cautious market place.”

No, you are probably right, that is not Imugene’s way. To invest in Imugene you need a whole lot of time on your hands to perform extensive research. You need to wait and wait and wait some more for clinical trial results to reach their eventual conclusion. Cause in the meantime the company is not going to go out of their way to sell their wares to all and sundry. To entice the little or even big fish into the swimming pool. That’s simply not the way they operate.

When I was leaving work my trade related colleague was standing outside the warehouse having a cigarette.

“What did you think of the video?” I asked.

“Mate I liked it. But look I don’t really know the first thing about Phase 1b, is it? Or Phase 2, or whatever it is. But it all sounds pretty good mate,” He said.

Maybe he was trying not to hurt my feelings. Probably thinks I’m crazy. Maybe I am. He’s about to buy an investment property. Upon reflection I doubt he or the others there would ever consider something like Imugene. But then as I hopped in my car and set out on the freeway I laughed and took the Hopper line “Well, who the hell am I to sell shares in the company. I don’t even work for it,” I laughed to myself, before flicking on Triple M, to hear a replay of Joseph taking his 7th wicket. How bloody good, I thought to myself. How bloody good, I pondered, with thoughts of small caps well behind me.

DYOR Seek investment advice as and when requires Opinions only