The investment case FOR Mesoblast, page-419

At 2.00am this morning, I checked HC to see the update on CLBP. Was surprised that the reception was as tepid as it was, as I felt that it was extremely good news. But left it to have another look at it later when the fog of sleep had lifted.

At the last investor conference, it was clear that the focus at the moment is Covid Ards (Novartis confirmation) and SRaGVHD. CLBP seems to be in the "later" file.

There was a clue in an old OP post about the data being so good that we might only require a short confirmatory trial but generally it seemed as if it would have to wait its turn.

Now there is a time line for this next C meeting (someone suggested 6 months) and the good news is that the company felt confident in its ability to move this area forward within the timeline of that meeting. It appears to also suggest that the first two priorities will have moved on to the next stage by then so there is enough "bandwidth" for the management to deal with this.

There has been a lot of questions over the adjustment of the milestone payments triggered in the Grunenthal deal and why the reduction. Indeed the "You pay, we say" media have used this as another doom and gloomer. Why? Well we know why they might say it, but my fellow LTH's?
I expected the usual suspects to vent large on our forum (I have them on ignore, but enjoy some of the responses) but I was surprised at the general lack of excitement.

These agreements are commercially sensitive, but when Grunenthal signed on to MPC-06-ID they would have envisaged the success of the trial on the CLBP treatments relevant to Europe, and that would have been reflected in the deal and the payments they were to have made. Hitting primary endpoints were a focus.

Opioids is primarily a USA issue. This application is focussed on that side. Even though it is not a major marketing opportunity in Europe, they still want in. So ignore this small adjustment in milestone payments and look at it purely from Stateside and Grunenthal figuring it was still worthwhile for them.

The USA market is considerable and is the focus of this "meeting". It also provides the FDA with an opportunity of helping a product that is desperately needed, to get out there. And our board consider that we have sufficient data to take the case forward. That will do me.

Assume a small confirmatory trial (I do not rule out EUA or AA to run alongside) we are looking at an income stream in 2023. That is exciting.
I am hoping that our Nasdaq investors share my view on this announcement. I am confident that Surgcenter collectively do.

So in summary, I take the announcement as having made the Investment case for Mesoblast, that much bit stronger. I agree with many posters who have pointed out the meetings that appear to be timetabled in July making that case overwhelming.

Regards
Yelrom