Alizyme Share Discussion Threads

[troutfish] 19/6/2009 10:27

When the voting papers come out in the next few weeks vote AGAINST the Remuneration Report .

[dunderheed] 19/6/2009 09:36

I'm thinking 4p post agm (then I might gamble some on this - pocket money only - depending on what the agm throws up of course - likely very little!) - 4p based upon if the Tim does not pull a 'massive' pay reduction out of the hat or does not of course throw himself out of the hat!

I'd 'heard' he was on the way out anyway if nothing delivered - now we shall see?!

BOL all!

[chronicler] 17/6/2009 22:56

A quick mention that during the Clint Eastwood film on Channel 5 this evening the 10.15pm interval featured an advert for Alli - the over the counter version of Orlistat.

This is the first time I have seen Alli advertised on British television. It was approved only recently for OTC use in the UK so they obviously didnt waste much time in starting the promotions.

Perhaps this could improve the profile of Alizymes diet pill Cetilistat.

[mad mike] 17/6/2009 21:27

Yes, I am the guy who asked all the questions about remuneration at the last AGM. I would have classed them as highly relevant questions, rather than awkward - LOL!

It was someone else's question that resulted in Tim's (cetilistat) guarantee reply. I just reported Tim's reply, as part of my AGM report (written up and posted within a few hours of the AGM).

I already have a few questions planned for this year's AGM. LOL!

For example, I recommend all shareholders to vote down the annual report (usually the first resolution), as it claims that William Edge resigned as a Director on April 1st this year, when his resignation should have taken effect at the close of last year's AGM.

According to the Chairman at the last year's AGM, Alizyme's Articles of Association state that all Board members over 70 must put themselves up for election at each year's AGM. At last year's AGM, William declared he was already over 70, and acknoweldged he should have put himself up for election. The fact that William failed to do so, must mean his Board Directorship lapsed at the end of the AGM.

What is the point of having articles of association if they are not kept to. Or do the Board feel that only those Article that don't apply to them have to be implemented!

Also, what is the legal postion of rest of the Board, knowingly continuing to pay a person as if they were a Board Director, when they knew the Directorship had lapsed. Is it misuse of company money?

That is the (minimum) reason I recommend all shareholders to vote down the company's remuneration report.

I'm fed up of company directors acting too much in their own interest rather than in the company's and shareholder's interests.

[edit: Of course the Board Chairman may have been confused at last year's AGM, and did not know his Company's Articles of Association. So maybe over 70's don't actually have to put themselves up for election each year. Unfortunately, he admitted he was confused enough to not know how his Executive Directors' remuneration worked - LOL!]

[dunderheed] 17/6/2009 20:57

mad same as you (nominee) - were you the guy who asked all the awkward quesions last year - especially about the salary package?
Also were you the guy who he 'guaranteed' a deal by this time?
I really want to get there and may make the time but as normal never end up doing it - should be really entertaining this year though!!

[mad mike] 17/6/2009 20:46

Only about 5 weeks to go before the AGM. Time is running out Tim - tick, tock, tick, tock.

BTW, does anyone have this year's AGM resolutions, and would it be too much trouble to post them here. My shares are in nominee accounts, so I don't get them direct.

If not, I'll contact the company.

[dunderheed] 17/6/2009 20:21

Well loafster will you be at the agm?

Vote him out!!

Vote him out!!

[phuckerty] 12/6/2009 17:49

Hi
I spoke to Tim and the word negotiations means the next stage to discussions also with more than one party so they can`t sqeeze Alizyme that much.
I got the impression that Alizyme are much nearer a deal than the market thinks,although Tim did not say this.
Regards

[the_doctor] 09/6/2009 18:04

Arena shares shoot up on positive obesity data

By John Carroll Comment | Forward

Arena Pharmaceuticals got a much-needed boost from investors yesterday after releasing new data showing that patients who stuck with the treatment regimen in a clinical trial of its experimental obesity drug did much better than the placebo arm of the study.

Arena's stock jumped 25 percent after Arena announced that two thirds of the patients taking lorcaserin lost at least five percent of their body weight during the study compared to only about a third of the placebo group. And a third of the lorcaserin group lost at least 10 percent of their weight. Patients taking the drug experienced an average weight loss of 17.9 pounds compared to an average loss of 7.4 pounds for the placebo.

The northward march of shares yesterday wiped out a steep plunge in share value last March, when investors reacted poorly to the news that lorcaserin had only hit one of two goals in a study. The mixed results sparked considerable speculation that even if the company won an approval lorcaserin might win only anemic sales results. The focus now shifts to two large trials of the drug. which the developer plans to submit with an NDA later in the year.

"Given the positive lorcaserin BLOOM results, we are focused on partnering efforts and realizing lorcaserin's significant commercial potential," Arena CEO Jack Lief said in a statement.


Related Articles:
Arena cuts 130 after drug data disappoints investors
Arena shares dive on debate over obesity data
Arena Pharma lands $50M financing deal
Developers advancing a new slate of weight loss drugs
Arena touts safety profile of obesity drug

[phuckerty] 08/6/2009 17:23

Hi Silver
If it is your suggestion then how can this be important facts.
Regards

[silverbackalpha] 07/6/2009 11:22

B4: how can you seriously sit beside your computer and seriously think allicryme has a brighter future? Surely that statement is completely misplaced and based on false belief and hope?

What evidence do you have to make such a statement? Please reveal all sources in your answer.

My suggestion is that the company is on the verge of bankruptcy. Tim McCarthy will never ever be able to raise cash again. Do you understand what that means? It means the only way to raise cash will be via DILUTION.

It is very important you imderstand and appreciate these important facts.



Birdie4 - 4 Jun'09 - 17:21 - 23641 of 23647


thedoctor, may I remind you that AZM currently has enough cash for three years at todays burn rate (3.2m as of April and less than 1m operating costs), not "little cash and desperate" as you quote.
Regarding why you fail to understand why institutions buy AZM and not "other" biotechs maybe, just maybe they see a brighter future in AZM than you do as opposed to those they "shun" which you think are better.

[the_doctor] 05/6/2009 11:57

Could be good or bad, depending on whether a class-wide effect (if proven)


Print article Send to a friend


FDA safety review on Chantix, Provigil, orlistat and 20 more
05 June 2009
The US Food and Drug Administration has published its quarterly report on treatments where the agency has identified a potential safety risk.

Among the high-profile drugs that the FDA has identified through its adverse event reporting system (covering October to December 2008), are Pfizer's overactive bladder treatment Detrol (tolterodine) and smoking cessation drug Chantix (varenicline), Roche's weight loss drug Xenical (orlistat) and GlaxoSmithKline's over-the-counter version of the drug Alli. Also included on the list are Merck & Co's HIV drug Isentress (raltegravir) and Cephalon's sleep disorder treatments Nuvigil (armodafinil) and Provigil (modafinil).

The FDA stresses that the appearance of a drug on this list, which contains some 20 treatments, does not mean that the agency has concluded that the therapy has the listed risk. The agency also emphasises that it is not suggesting that doctors should stop prescribing the drug or that patients should quit taking the medication.

Chantix is under review due to reports of serious skin reactions, visual impairment, angioedema and accidental injury in patients taking the drug, while Detrol is being investigated for a possible link to the skin condition Stevens-Johnson syndrome. Provigil and Nuvigil are also under review for serious skin reactions. As for orlistat, the FDA is investigating a potential hepatotoxicity link

[birdie4] 05/6/2009 10:38

the doctor, yes I am sure the costs are running at less than 1m pa, my figures are from the accounts and confirmed by the company. A conservative estimate based on the stated salary reductions effective April 09 would be 800k pa which then gives almost four years operational costs although I anticipate milestone payments (Takeda, Prometheus, Norgine) well before then.
If AZM is succesfull with CP and Ceti in Japan a future income stream would be considerable even without a Ceti ROW deal.
I still believe that AZM will get a deal and what gives me confidence is the speed with which Taked started their P111 trial and stated they wanted to get Ceti to market "as soon as possible".
All in my humble opinion of course.

[chronicler] 05/6/2009 09:52

loafofbred could you explain the significance of CFD providers holding so much Alizyme? Are you implying they expect there to be a lot of demand for the stock in the near future suggesting there might be some good news coming?



loafofbread - 4 Jun'09 - 10:28 - 23637 of 23645

The new CFD disclosure rules came into force on the 1st June.

Up pops Gartmore with 22%!

They had 12% which we knew about but along side they had another 10% in CFDs.

Pru still holding 20%, Gartmore adding to 22% and UBS still buying.

[chronicler] 04/6/2009 23:28

2nd UPDATE:FDA Evaluating Safety Of Weight Drugs Alli,Xenical
By Jennifer Corbett Dooren
Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The Food and Drug Administration is conducting a safety review of weight-loss drugs Alli and Xenical and looking at whether the drugs are linked to liver problems.

The FDA, in a quarterly report of drugs that lists potential safety issues the agency is evaluating, also said it was looking at serious skin problems possibly involving the smoking cessation drug Chantix and the over-active bladder drug Detrol. Both drugs are made by Pfizer Inc. (PFE). The most recent quarterly report was posted to the FDA's Web site Thursday.

Alli is an over-the-counter weight loss drug by GlaxoSmithKline PLC (GSK) and Xenical is the prescription strength version of the same drug made by Roche. ( RHHBY)

The FDA said the appearance of a drug on its quarterly report simply means the agency has identified a "potential" safety issue but doesn't mean the drug is the cause of the particular problem.

In a statement, Pfizer said it "continues to evaluate reports of any adverse events. As with all our medicines, we work with the FDA to ensure our labeling reflects the latest safety information."

The FDA has been looking at the safety of Chantix since late 2007 when it received reports of changes in behavior and suicidal thinking in some patients within days or weeks after starting Chantix treatment. Last year the label for Chantix was updated to include warnings about the possibility of severe changes in mood and behavior in patients using the product.

In the most recent quarterly drug report, which covers signals identified from the agency's Adverse Event Reporting System between October and December 2008, the FDA said it was looking at reports of angioedema, or a type of skin swelling that suggests an allergic reaction, visual impairment and accidental injury that are possibly associated with Chantix. The agency said it was "continuing to evaluate the need for any regulatory action."

Alli, approved in 2007, is currently the only FDA-approved over-the-counter weight loss product.

Malesia Dunn, a spokeswoman for GlaxoSmithKline's consumer health division, said there's no evidence Alli causes liver problems. She said the company has received a "few" reports of mild liver side-effects in relation to Alli, but noted that such reports don't mean a product has caused a particular problem. Dunn said about six million people use Alli daily.

Terence Hurley, a Roche spokesman, also said there's no evidence of a link between Xenical and liver injury and noted obesity is also a high risk factor for hepatic injury. However, he said the company "takes issues of patient safety very seriously and will continue to be in contact with the FDA on this."

-By Jennifer Corbett Dooren, Dow Jones Newswires; 202-862-9294; [e-mail]

(END) Dow Jones Newswires
4 June 2009

[silent cartographer] 04/6/2009 20:22

I sold out today. Got bored. Money is much better invested elsewhere.

Good luck chaps.

[loafofbread] 04/6/2009 20:18

FDA: Evaluating Safety Of Weight-Loss Drug Alli, Xenical





By Jennifer Corbett Dooren

Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The Food and Drug Administration is conducting a safety review of weight-loss drugs Alli and Xenical and looking at whether the drugs are linked to liver problems.

The FDA, in a quarterly report of drugs that lists potential safety issues the agency is evaluating, also said it was looking at serious skin problems possibly involving the smoking cessation drug Chantix and the over-active bladder drug Detrol. Both drugs are made by Pfizer Inc. (PFE). The most recent quarterly report was posted to the FDA's Web site Thursday.

Alli is an over-the-counter weight loss drug by GlaxoSmithKline PLC (GSK) and Xenical is the prescription strength version of the same drug made by Roche. (RHHBY)

The FDA said the appearance of a drug on its quarterly report simply means the agency has identified a "potential" safety issue but doesn't mean the drug is the cause of the particular problem.

[the_doctor] 04/6/2009 18:18

Birdie,

Are you sure costs are down that low?
If so, then apologies, I have that wrong

The insts may have done thorough research into cetilistat, I'm unconvinced.
Maybe they've been given hints re Takeda's plans

[birdie4] 04/6/2009 17:21

thedoctor, may I remind you that AZM currently has enough cash for three years at todays burn rate (3.2m as of April and less than 1m operating costs), not "little cash and desperate" as you quote.
Regarding why you fail to understand why institutions buy AZM and not "other" biotechs maybe, just maybe they see a brighter future in AZM than you do as opposed to those they "shun" which you think are better.

[phuckerty] 04/6/2009 17:16

Hi
I think you have been told what is going on if you read the intrim statement made two weeks ago, it is in the wording. Obviously the institutions have picked up on it.
Regards

[the_doctor] 04/6/2009 16:20

'Pru still holding 20%, Gartmore adding to 22% and UBS still buying.'

I fail to understand why insts that shun many other biotechs/ small caps own so much of this company that has little cash and is just sitting, desperately trying to outlicense a so-so product that quite possibly, nobody wants to pay up for the development of

Still, it isnt their money and Tim perhaps takes them out for a nice lunch.

[psyco] 04/6/2009 16:09

i say " aLLi Zyme " :-)))

[loafofbread] 04/6/2009 10:28

The new CFD disclosure rules came into force on the 1st June.

Up pops Gartmore with 22%!

They had 12% which we knew about but along side they had another 10% in CFDs.

Pru still holding 20%, Gartmore adding to 22% and UBS still buying.