Frustration and angst from a possible majority, balanced by sustained optimism from a committed minority, seems to be the ongoing order of the day with IMU shareholders - based on the Hotcopper IMU forum postings.We have some very well researched and articulate posters, our resident s… stirrers and a good sprinkling of what are best described as punters.
To me, what seems a fundamental issue, is the a lack of understanding by many, of the sector we are investing (or trading) in.
Speculative biotechs are by far the highest risk and if successful, the highest return sector on the ASX.
Also, the time to success or failure is often measured in decades, not years.
The hurdles that all biotech face to achieve success are significant, not only in achieving the development of effective treatments with acceptable safety profiles, but also in doing so, negotiating the highly complex approval processes and then, having done all that, successfully marketing the product/process, into a highly competitive international market.
This is in addition to successfully managing the cash demands of a pre income development business and well as shareholder expectations and considerations.
It’s no wonder that the success rate is so low.
Many here have compared IMU’s progress to the small number of current successful Australian based biotechs, NEU being one in particular.
I hold both.
I have held NEU for over 12 years, with my first purchase in January 2012 and have held IMU for just over 6 years with my first purchase in July 2018.
NEU has proven to be an outstanding investment and whilst I have sold my holding down to around 60% of my peak holding, it has allowed me to have my still largest holding free carried, whilst still realising great returns on what I have sold.
I am explaining this so that I can highlight that the NEU journey, whilst now successful, was far from easy and in many ways, similar to what IMU shareholders are currently experiencing.
It was 9 years into my NEU investment before things turned around and in the last 3 years has showed spectacular returns, that have every chance to continue.
In that first 9 years, the NEU forum was much like the IMU forum is today.
Luckily, in this case the optimism of those of us that stayed the journey, has been very well rewarded.
This however, does not mean that IMU will share the same success.
All investors - and I should highlight investors, not traders or punters, must continue to assess the progress of their investment in IMU and make their decisions based on what is best for them, given their own risk profile and financial situation.
IMU is not and will to be suitable to many investors, given the many risks to achieving success and more particularly the time frame. This can also be a catalyst for both personal and emotional trauma.
No investment is worth a personal health risk.
In my case and I am sure there are some others in the same boat, my continued investment in IMU has the benefit of not only the experience from the NEU journey, but also the emotional buffer that the financial reward has provided.
This possibly allows me to view the IMU progress through “rose-colored glasses”, however in my assessment and my opinion only, I am willing to maintain my investment, based on the following key considerations.
Firstly, whilst IMU is not providing a treatment to a condition that has no other proven treatments as does NEU, the market potential for IMU is much greater and the possibility of providing a safe, effective and much less invasive treatment for a range of cancers is possibly the “holy grail” of medical success.
Secondly, I believe that both IMU and NEU have been blessed to have ethical, dedicated and highly skilled staff and management, who have achieved significant international recognition. This is not the case with many speculative biotechs.
At similar stages in their development progress, both NEU and more importantly now IMU, have had no negative issues identified and the results from progressive trials continue to add credibility to treatment efficacy and confirm the safety profile.
Also, from a time frame point of view, it could be argued that IMU, is in fact ahead of the curve.
From my NEU experience, it would be another 3 years before I would start to see the share price to start to react to the successful trial progress.
My opinion is that the trial progress that IMU is achieving will see results well inside the next three years.
Hopefully, they will continue to be positive and be reflected in a share price that truely includes the value of our intellectual property.
If we are successful, it will provide a share price that is many multiples of the current share price, which I believe is significantly under valued, given the trial progress that we have already achieved on a multiple of products.
This is not financial advice, but in opinion my investment in IMU is still on course and the possibility of a significant return much better than is currently reflected by the market.
Again, in my opinion, markets are trading markets and as such, not willing or capable of truely looking forward - greater than a twelve month time frame is beyond them.
(20min delay)