CDMO (Contract Development and Manufacturing Organisation).
They will always be developing the vectors, we just won't be trying to develop / sell our own drugs to package inside those vectors anymore.
So with LentiVector (for example) every new partner gets offered 3rd or 4th generation to deliver their cargo, but they will be working on 5th - because if they don't then someone else will catch up.
The other tech (lots including TRiP, LentiStable, and such) is also in continuous development and not only gets offered to everyone with our vectors, but also as bolt on improvements to third party vectors. This is where Seb's team earn their money.
I don't know enough to be sure, but I'd imagine that the non AAV, AV or LV vectors that ABL were involved with prior to merger with OXB will all now have the benefit of OXB's bolt on value.
News is key and we are due some, but timescales in this industry are usually longer than you would think. |
Thanks for the reply. No I seriously was inquisitive about what development projects in which we still own licences. I do have very high hopes fir OXB with their new CDMI strategy, and I'm still adding to my holdings in OXB and Cambridge Cognition. My linkedin feeds are awash with open positions at OXB that's a good indicator the business is robust and growing. |
I do not think 'Bedford' was asking a serious question. I think it is another avatar of the one that departed last week. His aim is to try to raise then kill interest in various aspects of OXB, innocently of course, in order to drive expectations down. |
They tried for a long time to partner it, then spin it out into a JV, then just sell it. Ravi was brought in for the last attempt as he had previous experience of doing that successfully. It never happened.
So as of the final quarter last year, we have no in-house drugs. Yes we still own them and I guess they will still technically be for sale, but if that didn't happen in the previous 4 years? Admittedly those were some really weird years with covid and then the fall-out of covid, but if there was any interest then we were never told.
31st of Jan 2022 Sio (formally Axovant) hands back our most progressed clinical drug (they were going bust). Stuart did say following that, something to the effect that OXB had been in touch with 2 people who had been interested in ProSavin before Sio/Axovant licenced it, but with the time elapsed then I would consider that gone too.
What are they worth? That's an interesting question because the patent life is ticking on them all and some are still pre-clinical. ProSavin would be worth most as they have good patient data / safety data, but remember the patent life is ticking down so not as much as when it was licensed the first time.
My honest advice would be to consider them gone and if something does ever get sold on then it's a very pleasant surprise.
The bigger issue for us as shareholders is the savings of not progressing those drugs vs the paid work for partners (less outgoings vs more incomings).
Remember, Frank's £30m per year savings is like earning that every year against the possibility of doing a deal. Nothing sold for 4 years would equal the upfront payment on a huge deal. |
I'm not sure if this has been covered in other threads but I could not locate them. If we were to sell our legacy in house drug development portfolio (and I'm not completely up to speed what's in the OXB portfolio).
Does anyone have a best guess what these could be worth if sold at this stage? Or would they be more likely spun out into a new AIM listed company? Would this have a meaningful impact on our finances to fund growth or just neligable housekeeping. |
I'm not sure if this has been covered in other threads but I could not locate them. If we were to sell our legacy in house drug development portfolio (and I'm not completely up to speed what's in the OXB portfolio).
Does anyone have a best guess what these could be worth if sold at this stage? Or would they be spun out into a new AIM listed company? Would this have a meaningful impact on our finances to fund growth? |
There are a couple of possible homes for the money which we do know about boadicea, but how realistic I don't know.
There does seem to be a route to exercise the option on the last 20% of Homology early if it changes ownership. As Homology is now a part of Q32 Bio then maybe another 20m Euros makes that possible without taking our cash balance too low for future contingencies. Alternatively they wait until March next year when the other side will definitely trigger it.
Then of course there is the loan. 50m USD which is shown as £38.5m in the '23 annual report. £6.3m in interest last year? That loan is a 4 year loan from October '22. If the charges / penalties for paying it off early are cheaper than the remaining interest is likely to be, then does this 20m Euros make going debt free attractive to OXB?
Maybe the AGM on Monday will have an announcement to go with the resolutions? |
Was today's news a bit of deck-clearing before the big event? |
Makes sense to me. |
gh,
Something I've written before (probably too many times) but it can't be done unless the major holders (many who are in at much higher levels - like Serum with 3% at just under £15 per share) say yes.
To my mind there is only one buyer. They are the richest listed company in Europe and they already hold 12% of OXB, recently stating that they intend to use their weight loss drug windfall to buy speciality service companies to the pharma industry.
IM are undoubtedly a very wealthy private company, but we are talking different leagues to Novo.
So my prediction remains that Novo will sit on their enormous cash pile until OXB get their share price back to a level where a normal sales buyout multiple would placate all the other major holders. At that point OXB becomes a NN company and I suspect everybody will be happy. |
If ever there was an optimal time to take us out, it would be around now. Cash positive, derisked and growing It would have to a significant premium to today’s price and that’s the potential blocker as the predator wouldn’t want to be seen as overpaying. Interesting times |
I regard the news as positive.IM could well have been given the impression by OXB that it was best to take stock sooner rather than later.OXBs share price has been pretty dull over the last month in line with the US Nasdaq biotech index. |
I suppose it's a possibility Dom, but on my ADVFN monitor page there is quite a portion which seems to mimic OXB's daily ups and downs. I don't think we will ever know for sure.
We do know (for sure) that we are about to start commercial production with another CAR-T (in addition to Novartis - maybe J&J) which significantly strengthens our revenue going forwards over the life of that drug (usually many years).
So we know for sure that OXB have slotted this in before a multiple myeloma deal which we know is soon to start. The rest is a bit of a mystery - but quite a pleasant one to ponder. |
However, the price action over the recent weeks (sold down on open, then again in the close) suggests that someone has been carefully managing the share price |
This isn't the news which would have the insiders embargoed as it was all public.
OXB didn't need the money as they turned the year with cash of £103.7 million, told us that there was very little capex planned and that we would be broadly breakeven on operations this year. QED no immediate need for cash.
The timing of this was down to OXB not IM.
OXB would still get the same amount of money from IM whether they issued more or less shares than today in September as it's a contractual clause which IM were tied into for a fixed amount of cash in exchange for a variable amount of new shares.
My take on this (caution the glass half full here) is that the timing when OXB don't need the cash is a thankyou to IM with an eye to what is comming.
IM sold us ABL for an unbelievably low multiple of sales and then also put in 10m Euro in cash to fund the transition of ABL to exactly what OXB needed.
If OXB have now looked at what might happen in the next quarter and decided it's right to let ABL have the shares at the average today, then I'm fine with that and see it as fair given what they did for us.
Those of us who have been here for a while might remember when we ended up borrowing from a very sharp outfit who on top of onerous loan terms also wanted their share of the company for free (wasn't it 4%?) as a signing on tribute. After the loan term ended they then sold those free shares down against us as a thank you. This RNS today is a much fairer and more acceptable arrangement. |
I stand corrected! |
Actually the price was 30-day VWAP, not 6m.... "share price of 325p per ordinary share, being the 30-day VWAP to closing on 17 June 2024." This could shift materially over a period of a few weeks particularly if a major event were announced in that time. One can only speculate on whether the timing of this event might have a connection with the imminence or otherwise of any such event. |
If I was IM I would buy in asap for cheapest price - why would I wait and overpay? |
The market doesn't like uncertainty, and in picky markets even relatively minor uncertainty could be used as a stick to beat the share price with...
As the price for IM was the 6m VWAP price, the volume over the recent results would still be a chunky weighting. If the share price moved higher in the coming months it would need volume as well to pull the calculated price materially higher. |
Being kind to us as shareholders as this in effect acted as a major hand brake on the share price going up in my view....let's see if this is right or not with how share price moves now |
So at OXB discretion till September?Which way do you want to play itOXB thinks that it is unlikely there will be much better share price in that period so go now. OrOXB thinks the share price will be much higher and wants a good deal for IM ? |
The share price now that has been agreed was absolutely not known by us - was it? |
"As previously communicated this investment follows Oxford Biomedica's acquisition of ABL Europe SAS, ....."
On that basis it was a known factor and would not appear to necessitate an embargo on insider trading - but wdik. |
I think the timing was any time up to end September (maybe wrong), so I simply think they have been pragmatic to choose now...removes important uncertainty around OXB... |