Share
2,396 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 628
clock Created with Sketch.
26/10/23
17:27
Share
Originally posted by Teddyward
↑
Point is , if it was happening , when you see 10 new nominee accounts all being bought through 1 or 2 brokers , likely suspects with large corporate actions dept etc etc as a company sec and CEO you take notice and start preparations and try and ensure there is some price tension in market or you sit on your hands? Reality IMO is not happening the truth is that large pharma pay up upon real success after proper trials with definitive results and already have their drug interest locked down and only very occasionally do they buy platforms early. unless to prevent competition. There is no price tension.
I know joohnno many people say that various companies will in theory buy and wharehouse stock for supposed take over or corporate action but reality is that the old days of a pub handshake and a holding company wharehousing with a side agreement ( even with ASIC as weak as piss in enforcement and limited reach beyond Aust) the corporates in USA are working inder much stricter compliance structures.with serious penalties. A intermediatory taking a punt on hope of corporate action at this stage - wow that is a massive big punt on timing with a biotech and there is enough margin without the massive high risk just to pile in when there is actually a success as the value always overruns and intermediatory can get their margin and turnover shares.
There is only approx 3 million shorts and a serious player could easily push this harder and force the hand of exiting selling instos and make a extra 20% by shorting and killing existing market lowering it and when exiting funds are gone sop up balance and take the margin back to fair pricing. There seems little interest in shorts and I suspect the funds we think are selling at massive loss were actually previously holding and hedging part of position with shorts ( via lending to internal trading desk for another fund) .
The other truth is that unless SPL actually put out suitable information that the market can undestand and trust and spoon feed it with some defenitove timelines no one is interested. So management need to be able to present some realistic information without all the aspirational marketing spiel they currently do.
IMO the total lack of interest and comment on presented papers / data / posters by industry is telling and partially due to early stage and IMO some trial design.
As usual I have no idea on such matters but in regards to comments regarding below cash backing SPL has lots of expenses and should current prospects not get a winner it is a very long haul to get another andidate to a point of market interest of even to get the existing candidates spruiked for years to next level and since they had sucess last time I would be surprised is a corpotate broker convinced them to raise and cash in trying to introuce a new holder to register - hence no reason for a new interested party to buy on market as SPL IMO would love to do a issue and get $ in accounts and new holder on books . Cheap issue and dilution - who cares about existing holders would be managements call as they are not seeing support from existing holders in marketplace anyway. Warning signs will be if you see some research from a broker as no interest unless a corporate fee involved. Now who is SPL "house " broker again and what have they been doing?
Get copy of register and broker data for comparable periods is all I can suggest and learn what it means .fro those who do not know.
You could dream about some informative quarterly commentary but IMO that would be out of step with teh usual bland nothingness
Expand
Good arguments Teddyward and I tend to agree, however:
Let is consider some blue sky for a moment, a firm like Mundipharma, owned by very wealthy criminals . They had a distribution licence for Vivagel, they know it works, they were not very active in selling it because it competed with their other products. They extricated themselves from the distributorship which I would imagine contained some restrictions on what they might do in corporate actions. They see a bargain in a market they know very very well. And it is a huge market, bigger than cancer.
I would not put this past them. Oh what a tangled web we weave!