Alizyme Share Discussion Threads

[kenilworth castle] 01/7/2009 23:01

Anyone remember this. Last October and November vow said the share price would go to 38p on technicals; then a takeover would be at 30p; that analysts were saying a takeover at 20p; then he expected a slow rise to 50p.

If cetilistat passes stage 3 in Japan next year the share price will be very much higher. That is what is for play here not slagging off other posters.

A vow example:-


VOW - 24 Nov'08 - 09:52 - 21597 of 23820

OPtima,

Deramping?

I say takeover will be at 30p at most, analysts say 20p so I am more bullish than them. Using industry standard formula.

Xenical sales topped $250m, I say that we could see double that at the peak (although tailing off sharper) So I am bullish on that. Using Xenicals own published data 2007.

This is why I hold.

[city chappy] 01/7/2009 22:33

Is this what bought you out again vow? Posters making sensible comments and agreeing with one another.

[city chappy] 01/7/2009 22:26

I was wondering when vow would get round to mentioning QAZ.

Just three posts in and he is at it again.

What a plonker.

[mad mike] 01/7/2009 22:11

VOW, whether there is a duty to call an AGM each year, will be determined by what is stated in Alizyme's Articles of Association.

Has anyone ever been given a copy?

Actually, I wanted to look at the Articles of Association for other reasons (that pre-date the recent announcement).

[chronicler] 01/7/2009 22:11

Well said dunders.

[dunderheed] 01/7/2009 21:51

VOW you don't know it either - and you don't own shares in azm - so why are you posting on here pal?!
Can't be for another errr (masters) thesis can it?

[chronicler] 01/7/2009 21:51

trout your analysis looks about right. i think VOW has his own agenda here.

[vow] 01/7/2009 21:24

You don't know that.

I am talking about companies that have delisted. You still own shares but they are "untradable" as there is no official market for them. So worthless.

I am pretty sure that AZM will have paid up their main listing fees for the majority of this year, so I don't read that as they are moving to AIM or PLUS.

AIM still costs over £200k per year, compared to £400k for main, and then there all the legals, such as AGM's, RNS etc that all cost money. Another £100k per year according to some sources.

So over the next year that is £300k more they need, so they will need to raise that at least before August.

[troutfish] 01/7/2009 20:38

It means they will move from the "main market" to AIM which is cheaper to list on, is where they were originally listed in the late 1990s and where they probably should have been all along.

The current shares will continue to be valid and tradeable after they move to AIM, just as they are were when they moved up from AIM to the "main market" in the late 1990s.

Moving to AIM will save the company money so is good. It might also help reduce the influence of AT trading (although I am not sure on this).

PS
I think you are getting confused with companies that have bought back their own shares and then delisted, which is not the case here. AZM are moving down to AIM to cut the costs of the listing on the "main market".

[troutfish] 01/7/2009 20:34

If cetilistat Japan comes good next year you could be looking at a share price above 50p on the day of the announcement. Got to be worth keeping them afloat till then.

[vow] 01/7/2009 20:11

In light of the last statement:

"The Company, with its advisers, is also considering the suitability of the
Company's current main market listing given its market capitalisation and
limited resources."

If they delisted before the AGM I assume all shares are still valid (they are just untradable) so shareholders would be entitled to attend, but would it be public, ie via invitation only? Also under new small company rules they wouldn't even need to have an AGM, so could avoid the flak.

Not experienced any similar this close to an AGM before, but know with other companies that an AGM hasn't been open to shareholders after they delisted.

[chronicler] 01/7/2009 19:54

Looking at it objectively I cannot see it being in anyones interests to let Alizyme go under particularly as it would take relatively little cash to keep them as a going concern until the results of the Cetilistat Phase 3 results are available from Takeda next year, which should be positive, and after which Alizyme should receive a very large milestone payment and subsequent sales royalties and the shares have big upside compared to todays price.

I therefore think some of the larger shareholders like Prudential and Gartmore will stump up enough cash to keep Alizyme ticking over through to H2 next year. Based on the above assumptions it is likely there might also be new investors interested in entering at the bottom.

P.S.
Can anyone going to this months AGM please make a digital recording and post it onto Youtube so everyone can hear the proceedings. Alizyme do not make webcasts of their AGM's.

[silverbackalpha] 01/7/2009 18:57

mm: yes, thats ture. I went to the analysts meeting which I recorded. My bad. The agm was recorded on the web site i believe?

I did go to one, but I cant honestly recall if it was 2007/2008!

[dunderheed] 01/7/2009 17:56

hey good point mm - know why you are questioning this - because you elicited that guarantee of RoW by the agm this year - can't remember if it was specific question you asked or whether in response to another - but you certainly noted it.

Silver seriously do you have a tape of the agm - surely you would have popped that one up already - having witnessed all the previous talk about the 'promise'!

[mad mike] 01/7/2009 17:37

Silver, your post below seems to imply that you recorded last year's AGM. Is that true?

I thought you said you didn't attend last year's AGM, but instead you went to another event that Tim presented at, straight after the AGM.

Do you really have a recording of last's years AGM. If so I would be interested in getting access to a copy.

=========
silverbackalpha - 1 Jul'09 - 12:32 - 209 of 212

Yes I will [record this year's AGM]. I did last time.

==========

[chronicler] 01/7/2009 16:49

Looking at it objectively I cannot see it being in anyones interests to let Alizyme go under particularly as it would take relatively little cash to keep them as a going concern until the results of the Cetilistat Phase 3 results are available from Takeda next year, which should be positive, and after which Alizyme should receive a very large milestone payment and subsequent sales royalties and the shares have big upside compared to todays price.

I therefore think some of the larger shareholders like Prudential and Gartmore will stump up enough cash to keep Alizyme ticking over through to H2 next year. Based on the above assumptions it is likely there might also be new investors interested in entering at the bottom.

[ps0u3165] 01/7/2009 15:59

Dunders - thought so, I still look in on skp and see you posting. Like yourself I only have pin money left in these, skp, rene and wrote them off 18 months ago.

One thing I have learnt from investing here and skp is these bio's are just cash drains not worthy of my time or money.

EDIT Hope to see timmy out before I go.

[dunderheed] 01/7/2009 14:58

Mate wtgr it is just pocket money now - and I am ever an optimist - I feel that if Alan can convince the market the rubbish previously put about by 'management' is really in the past and give a 'real' appraisal (not Timiny cloud cuckoo land RoW we're at the races/company transforming deals stuff) as to where we stand - then he may be able to get some more cash - on much lower cost base - to take us to a point where some milestones may kick in which will go some way to providing a more stable cash footing to further commercialise assets owned by azm.

I believe other pharma companies may be more likely to be forth-coming with deals if they realise they don't have to deal with the Tim anymore as well?

EDIT as a rather large laughable caveat - please bear in mind I have 'hung on' for years at skp as well!!
Also cenes/oxb etc etc

[ps0u3165] 01/7/2009 14:52

Thanks Dunders - I take it you are going to hold on then?

edit

[silverbackalpha] 01/7/2009 13:09

I have notified him of email assurances given by TM, following my grave concerns about the company cash position.

[silverbackalpha] 01/7/2009 13:08

Please use THIS thread, not the other one!

Dunderheed - 1 Jul'09 - 10:39 - 23798 of 23801


loaf me old mucker - when the two of us are on thread at the same time I'd like to get a contact address for you as have spoken to AG myself now.

capricious - 1 Jul'09 - 11:51 - 23799 of 23801


Hi Dunderheed,

Can you give a brief overview of the conversation?

Cheers

ant15 - 1 Jul'09 - 11:59 - 23800 of 23801


Dunderheed I wouldnt mind knowing that too.Risky old business Bioetch!!! especially at the moment with noone wanting to back it.

Dunderheed - 1 Jul'09 - 12:44 - 23801 of 23801


Hi err not sure how much I can divulge on here.

1. The guy seems sound and honest - he is not currently getting paid and told me I can infer from that he feels there is a viable future (of sorts) for azm.
2. He seemed very surprised to hear that the Tim had clearly told me that there were no cash issues - about four weeks ago - exact reason I cannot go into here.

If you are a share-holder suggest you ring him personally to discuss - he is very approachable and maybe this is because of the amount of cash I had already invested in azm - which as each day goes by seems to be very small compared to what some share-holders have lost - I am hearing some incredible and worrying stories.

I told him clearly I felt the Tim should be sacked and would be prepared to provide sworn affadavit as to the things he told me over the phone if that helped in any way of sacking him - with no compensation of course - I get the feeling that the Tim has told a lot of other PI's a similar story and hence maybe it would be worth contacting the company to formally record such an issue? The more people that circumstantially provide such 'evidence' the more likely we are to achieve the Tim getting summarily dismissed?
All imho of course!

Would like a chat with loafy if he is about?

[dunderheed] 01/7/2009 12:44

Hi err not sure how much I can divulge on here.

1. The guy seems sound and honest - he is not currently getting paid and told me I can infer from that he feels there is a viable future (of sorts) for azm.
2. He seemed very surprised to hear that the Tim had clearly told me that there were no cash issues - about four weeks ago - exact reason I cannot go into here.

If you are a share-holder suggest you ring him personally to discuss - he is very approachable and maybe this is because of the amount of cash I had already invested in azm - which as each day goes by seems to be very small compared to what some share-holders have lost - I am hearing some incredible and worrying stories.

I told him clearly I felt the Tim should be sacked and would be prepared to provide sworn affadavit as to the things he told me over the phone if that helped in any way of sacking him - with no compensation of course - I get the feeling that the Tim has told a lot of other PI's a similar story and hence maybe it would be worth contacting the company to formally record such an issue? The more people that circumstantially provide such 'evidence' the more likely we are to achieve the Tim getting summarily dismissed?
All imho of course!

Would like a chat with loafy if he is about?