Pretty big volume again today. |
 I think a good clue here would be how much they are paying Frank (which we of course don't know). If it's some token amount (or less) then I would be certain he is there to keep an eye on things for OXB's benefit relating to something we don't know about yet.
As we all know, OXB have spent a fortune in both continually developing their own tech (current LentiVector being 4th generation) and buying in latest generation AAV and such. If some kind of tie-up with ArcticZymes is a shortcut to the next level and keeps OXB at the front, then it needs to be done before someone else does it.
Whatever that possible deal might be, and obviously this is speculation, is a pretty limitless list from simply an exclusive / non-exclusive rights deal (with or without royalties), through swapping tech, to swapping shares - and that goes without mentioning our very recently enlarged cash pile.
A point to bear in mind here might be the way ArcticZymes look at OXB's customer base - where a deal with OXB could be viewed as 30 to 50 little (and not so little) deals in one sweep.
If there is something coming then OXB would have known about this long before ArcticZymes announced at the end of June, which would fit quite nicely in explaining some other mysteries.
As always, the real story (if there is anything in it) will become clear in time. |
We clearly have some world leading technology particularly in lentiviral vectors but it is just possible that Arcticzymes have something which will improve our lead even further? Hopefully anyway! |
I've commented previously that the role of the CEO is to drive the company forward and all their energy and time should be in doing that.
It would be interesting if a welder in an engineering works making railings told management he had taken the position of a welder at an engineering works down the road two days a month fabricating pressure vessels. In doing so he would gain greater exposure to modern welding and fabricating techniques, he would be more marketable in the future with his gained skills and the company would benefit because he could weld the railings they manufactured even better. Obviously his salary would increase due to income from both revenue streams.
Only wondering, don't shoot me down! |
No. It’s not normal.
In my view it’s also not very acceptable.
All effort should be directed to his ceo role.
I’m surprised that some of the institutions haven’t kicked off |
1996 they floated on AIM and very quickly went main market. I've owned OXB shares for well over 20 years and the AIM part is long before me. All the time I've owned though, people have regularly incorrectly labelled OXB as AIM. I don't know why that is.
But today I'm more perplexed by this idea that it would be normal for the CEO of Boeing to sit on the non-exec advisory board of Airbus, that the Barratt CEO would do that for Wimpey, the boss of Tesco advising ASDA, and so on.
Appreciate that there is often Eurovision style voting here, but even so - do we really think that's normal? I don't. |
All of them :¬) Thanks for the pointer - I've only just realised that oxb is main market listed - so even less to worry about :¬)) |
Which AIM company would that be? |
I'd have thought a CEO would be unlikely even to be offered a NED post that wasn't in some way related to his existing job - that's what the second company is looking for after all (except perhaps in services such as law and finance, where skills are presumed to be transferable).
Lucky that AIM CEOs are people of such high integrity! |
What about the seeming conflict of interest though red?
OXB have a lot of purification IP for viral vector applications. Half ArcticZyme's business seems to be viral vector purification.
Surely Frank can't be CEO of one company doing that and Chairman of another with a competing technology?
Unless of course there is some relationship coming which might finally explain the mystery of why none of the senior staff bought in the last open period? |
I'm my UK plc experience (now ancient!) the CEO would always take a non-exec role at another company, never more then one, but not necessarily smaller Non exec chairman is a bit more work, but with a very small company it would be ok. The reasoning was that they needed exposure to other board dynamics, better to understand the governance scrutiny they came under as CEO. It was also to help them prepare for the raft of NED roles they would inevitably pick up on retirement! |
It`s all above my head H but you could be correct.
"In addition to that, salt-tolerant endonucleases allowed the removal of chromatin, one of the most critical impurities and often overlooked in enveloped virus DSP." |
In the UK it's a bit unusual for a CEO to have a second job Josef.
With non-exec roles it's very common - and you do get people with many directorships - but at CEO level it's normal to focus everything on your job.
So the concern (I would prefer to say interest as I'm not concerned) is why Frank should want a little part time job.
There's nothing to stop him of course (unless it's prohibited by his contract) but you'll appreciate that there is potential for a conflict of interests if the companies are related.
My inclination here would be to say that ArcticZymes is a small company and his Chairman role will be limited to a couple of days per year and being available for advice.
On the other hand, a little part of me remembers that Dr. Sébastien Ribault (OXB's Chief Commercial Officer) is an adviser to Institut Merieux who decided to become part of OXB by basically swapping their ABL Europe for OXB shares.
So, is there something at ArcticZymes which would compliment / help with something which Frank wants to do at OXB? The answer of course is that I don't know enough about the science to be able to make that possible connection.
This part (which of course as an ArcticZymes shareholder you are already familar with). Does it make TetraVecta + LentiStable even better? As I say, I don't know. |
You’re right. It seems They forgot. I don’t really understand why it concerns OXB shareholders. Anyway, it is about a month late.
Regarding ArcticZymes, the head office is far beyond the arctic circle.
Regards, AZT shareholder 😎 |
New linked in post |
So 4 of you really think that this company doesn't do what it promises?
Pretty serious worry that one. I know where I'd be if I felt that way - and I certainly wouldn't have any money here. |
You got a really great presentation at the end of April listing the state of play and explaining why 3 year annual growth forecast was raised from 30 to 35%+.
Since then (at the AGM) they have confirmed everything still on track and IM recently gave then c£17m for new shares.
Today is the end of July. If nothing else you are due a great presentation on everything at the interims in less than 2 months. Likely something before.
It's not really a news blackout is it? But it is more or less normal for OXB. |
Fact is this company clearly does not do what it promises j, which is not a good position to bat from. There may be all sorts of excuses for withholding information but a statement that they are doing so for strategic reasons is then all they need to say. |
If you want my 2 cents Phil then I would say the key word in all of that is "aiming".
All current indications are that they have a lot on and for whatever reason the RNS updates don't seem to be their highest priority at the moment. An example being the one yesterday which came over a month after the other company announced. So they either forgot or it's just not a priority for them.
I think the circumstantial evidence that they seem to have renewed the lease on Yarnton (dedicated Novartis facility) when previous advice at every report was that the lease was up in '24 and would have us consolidating in OxBox, indicates that even with the extra capacity in France and Boston, it makes sense to keep Yarnton and a lot of duplicated costs. If that it true then they have a lot of work.
Why they haven't said as much since the last (informal) update at the AGM, I don't know, but I do know that the forecast that they are tied to - i.e. the guidance that they have to revise / inform the market in good time of a material change, is the full year not the interims (as the interims effectively becomes the FY guidance with c80% certainty).
There are certain things here which they will announce on at some point. Two obvious examples being:-
The recent CAR-T commercial production deal for multiple myeloma. That could easily exceed what we earn from Novartis as it's a bigger market. Add another 8th or more to your revenue (I'm guessing) then keep that for the life of the drug and that is RNS worthy. Also I don't see how they can avoid naming the client. At the moment I imagine that is to keep things as smooth as possible with their current supplier, but once supply starts then there will be so many mentions of OXB in the QA/QC paper trail which goes in "the book" (mandated for FDA/EMA traceability) that it would be an impossible secret to keep. If it's a big name (obviously we think Jansen / J&J) then that's worth as much to OXB as when we signed with Novartis (a lot).
Similar argument applies for the Serum MSA (where we know the client but not the drug). Sooner or later we know what that is for (we have guessed malaria) but commercial supply of anything for 10 years is worth a fortune to OXB.
My many years of OXB watching tells me that although they might not be the best at communicating it, the situation is a good one. Whether we find that out at the interims or earlier remains to be seen. |
Well I suppose they could give us an update saying nothing has changed since our last update Maybe there was an expectation in April that a lot more progress would be made that hasn't happened yet |
—Question from analyst (April 29th)
You've provided a sort of an April update on the business development backlog but you've only given us a March update for the revenue backlog
—-Stuart (April 29th)
We can't until we in April. And as Sébastien said, I think that's a good word significant. We can't give any more details now. They will come in due course. As you know, we're committed to the communication plan of being far more frequent into the market now and give more frequent updates on our progress in terms of trading updates and you'll see that when we do our next trading update.
—investor relations
We are aiming to put out updates on a quarterly basis, two of these would be our regular full and year and half year financial results (normally put out in April and September each year).
Since this is the first year of doing this we do not have a fixed schedule yet for the two other updates, but we are aiming for one of them to be between now and September. Once we have a full year’s ‘cycle’ completed you should expect these updates to be more predictable.
Ergo, they set expectations. |
Expectations ? Only reason for an update if trading was materially higher or lower than previous guidance |
Ok, so no update. The high likelihood it will be September now, so why set expectations…? |
That news was out over a month ago from ArcticZymes. Do you think OXB just forgot?
I remember looking at the office location (up near the Artic Circle) and thinking that Frank's going to be a remote / homeworking Chairman. But then again, I guess that most of them (like Roch) are. |
Register to chat with like-minded investors on our interactive forums.
Hot Features
Premium
