I think many here are underestimating the detrimental effect...

I think many here are underestimating the detrimental effect having a potential IP dispute hanging over your head becomes when discussion with potential licensors or acquirers are. If there was any whiff of a risk of RAC rights to utilise bisantrene as an FTO inhibitor due to CoH's claims over the Su et. al paper we would potentially be in big trouble.

On the balance of things, $22M USD in milestones and low single digit royalties are peanuts in the grand scheme of things, and importantly, they are known quantities in any negotiations. I.e its easy to value something where you know that you're going to owe CoH as opposed to looking down the barrel of years of expensive litigation with an unknown result.

It would be nice to have greater clarity around the penalties from missing these milestones. But remember, we can extend each of them out 6 months. Marketing approval from an FTO indication in January 2030 (6 years from July 2023, plus 6 months extension) is not as out of reach as people might think.

For example, BMS's Krazati just won accelerated approval off the back of Phase 1/2 trial data.

If you look at the updated strategy from RAC, Phase 1a/1b trial could finish in H2 2026, with the Phase 2 trial potentially finishing in H2 2028, even H2 2029 accounting for potential delays keeps us within the realm of reaching approval in an FTO related indication by the deadline date in the CoH deal.