Why IMU is a multi multi bagger, page-23402

Treading water

As the labour market in the US continues to cool, if not slow, the Dow Jones pushes into the green for the sixth day straight. As noted by me last year in times of deflation markets tend to run ahead with the fear of further interest rises dissipating with each and every rise in the jobless count.

Unfortunately the rtise in markets has failed to result in a rise in all boats as it were, IMU being one of them. As per usual IMU has gone the other way, against the rising tide. Some blame investor expectations for always anticipating blue skies ahead when it comes to the diverse Aussie biotech, others blame management for failing to map out a commercial pathway following a number of capital raises in years gone by. Many simply hold their IMU shares in the hope of things to come, following the so called science until the companys clinical trials run their course.

In recent times the share price has crashed following a supposed data cut in the company's flagship and prioritised Vaxinia (MAST) Trial. Given the fact the April 2024 data was not released individually to the ASX in detail, but appeared through Quarterly Activity Reports and third parties such as Roth Capital Partners, the market became concerned with guidance in the ongoing trial. Why weren’t the results tabled in detail to the market as they were in November 2023, outlining ongoing performance in specific cancer indications, some began to ask. Many had been awaiting further scans from the 6 out of 7 gastrointestinal patients who had displayed positive immune responses prior to November. Whilst others had been sitting on the edge of their seats to see if the disease stabilisation patients from the November data cut had exhibited positive immune responses in more recent scans. Alas, no such information was released to the market. To date investors are aware half the original trial participants are still on treatment, which is obviously a good sign. The other half have clearly moved on from treatment given the drugs failure to elicit any meaningful response. Of those who have moved on there may well have been complications, which is no doubt to be expected given the advanced nature of their disease, their low levels of immunity and their failure to respond to previous treatment lines.

I guess of more concern to ong term holders, who have been calling for clear and concise details from the patient scans, is the absence of Vaxinia’s founder, Professor Yuman Fong, from the equation. Having expressed a desire not to steal Professor Fongs thunder over a year ago now, Imugene CEO and Managing Director Leslie Chong raised investor hopes that one day Professor Fong would ride into town with a pot of gold on his back, bringing with him news of a cure for cancer to all those who had kept the faith. Alas, no such claps of thunder eventuated, aside from a rather soggy ending to what turned out to be a rather mild summer.

So where to now for Imugene holders? I myself would like to hear from each of the product founders, in particular Yuman Fong, Pravin Kumaya and Saul Priceman. Wouldn’t it be fantastic to hear their take on the ongoing trials for their products, and to gauge from them what they see as the road ahead in the development of each. Perhaps company management could even throw in an interview with Ursula Wiedermann from the University of Vienna, to discuss her take on Her Vaxx’s future and potential development in years to come. Whilst Imugene’s own personnel including Chong have been present in interviews and seminars espousing the virtues of each product, clearly investors are more keen to hear it from the horses mouth as it were, from those who actually created the science.

In terms of Imugene management they have all tended to stick together and watch eachothers backs, as the IMU story has continued to unfold, against the backdrop of an ever worsening share price. It could be said leading appointments including Dr Jakob Dupont and Kim Drapkin in the US have failed to deliver any real investor traction over there, with no leading healthcare funds or institutions taking a substantial position in IMU. From an investment perspective it always worried me how none of Imugene's directors were present buying shares on market. In fact they were more often than not seen selling their holdings, as was the case when it came to the IMU Chairman Paul Hopper. In terms of company management, having supposedly manned the phones for years now the Chief Business Officer Moinil Shah has failed to fire a shot when it comes to bringing anything decent into the company from a monetary perspective. How Leslie Chong continues to keep him on the books is yet another sign of mismanagement where many are concerned, exemplifying what many believe to be a lack of commercial direction.

The hope for many staying the course is that positive news arrives in the form of an update in the ongoing PD1 Vaxx combination trial with Roche Therapeutics Tercentriq. The IMPRINTER Trial is taking place with non small lung cancer patients of whom there are countless numbers worldwide, facing a huge unmet need. Then there is the promise of results in the ongoing Oncarlytics OASIS Trial in combination with Amgen’s BLINCYTO, another outcome well worth waiting for. In the background many are praying for a commercial outcome for the companys initial B cell candidate Her Vaxx, which has been sidelined for some time now. Whilst as always I myself am burning a candle for Imugene’s leading candidate Vaxinia. Irrespective of recent developments I still see it as providing Imugene and their long term holders with the keys to the castle. Azer Cel may well keep the company afloat in the year to come, but I do see Vaxinia as being the game changer it promised to be pre clinically. In essence the drug has stabilised cancer in a number of late stage cancer patients with solid tumours now, a feat that should not go unnoticed. Shareholders are yet to visualise the results of the drug once dosed at the higher 10 parts to the 8 level, which is something well worth holding on for, in my humble opinion.

I guess in summary its a bit of a let down the way things have transpired in recent weeks if not months. But rest assured shareholders are in no way to blame for setting high expectations when it comes to investing. Handing over their own hard earned money to company executives charged with the responsibilty of delivering sound returns is part and parcel of any share transaction. And when those paid executives are seen to fall short in delivering upon shareholder expectations, then what does one expect? Suffice to say let’s not put the cart before the horse. There is plenty more to play out when it comes to the IMU story, and irrespective of who is steering the ship I for one am confident the scientists shall win in the end, at whatever the cost.

DYOR Seek investment advice as and when required Opinions only