A few thoughts on the current newsflow:1. Hard to see the ASCO...

A few thoughts on the current newsflow:

1. Hard to see the ASCO safety data announcement being anything other than positive. As I posted some time ago, the accelerated approval from the FDA to commence phase 3, would not have occurred if they had any concerns in that area imo.

2. Good to see the shareholder briefing planned for June 15th. Would have liked to hear from Dr Frazer, in addition to other senior management. I look forward to assessing the presentation style of Matthew Lehman. He has big shoes to fill, but his CV suggests he can.

3. I have concerns that the continuing decline in DNDN's market cap might have a flow on effect, weighing down PBMD in the process. I recall discussions a couple of years ago re whether PRR was fair value at about 5% of DNDN's market cap. Now it is 15+%, and rising. Senior management have a challenge to convince the US analysts that the company is different (and superior) to DNDN.

4. Despite the long term promise of the lesser programs in the Prima portfolio, they are still at the clinical stage, many years from commercialisation. So imo the future of PRR rests squarely on the shoulders of CVac. With that in mind, I absolutely agree with '4seasons' assessment earlier in the week, of the significance of the appointment of Matthew Lehman as the new CEO.

In his previous role, ML would have been well aware of the current progress of the 2b trial.

In my experience, good people don’t align themselves with failure. Since the trial has now been running for 2 years, I suspect he has taken on the role of CEO, confident, with good reason, of Cvac's long term potential.

5. When the phase 3 trial approaches full enrolment, the quarterly accounts will give a much better idea of cash burn going forward. Until then I would just be guessing.

I am mindful of Dr Frazer's very clear recent reference to "our strong desire to do merger and acquisition activity". My gut feel is that the 2b interims are likely to be positive. And if that proves to be the case, in an environment where large pharma are paying a premium for prospective treatments, PRR will be in a stronger position to negotiate a licensing/partnering deal.

So if there is a potential shortfall, due to phase 3 cash burn, I would be looking for a commercial arrangement that avoided a significant and dilutive capital raising. Time will tell.

6. In the next couple of years, the best result for PRR imo would be the FDA calling a halt to the trials because Cvac clearly works. This is an outcome that now seems potentially more likely for orphan drugs, given the US House of Reps vote this week. Wishful thinking? Perhaps.

Good luck all. Herro