Jump to content

PYC - PYC THERAPEUTICS LIMITED


ShareCafe

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

In reply to: Enumerate on Thursday 13/03/08 08:43am

I have to say I am a bit sceptical.

 

RNAi was discovered in 1998. Ten years later we should, any day get validation of it as a therapeutic from Dr Rossi.

 

The FDA has only recently accepted antisense immunotherapeutic benchmarks for successful commercialization.

 

What must we expect when looking at PYC who say their jigsaw is only partially complete and are still having their science proven at a pre-clinical state by un-named partners who happen to be Pfizer and Roche?

 

And more than that, what can we expect from a CEO-less, understaffed, under-resourced, cashless in 12-15 months time company led by a couple of venture capitalists?

 

If the plan is to continue developing the science then don't hold your breath.

 

If the plan is to bolt it on to the keiretsu that is developing then expect a PIPE with licences for cashflows.

 

However, I'm more inclined to think it will just be a complete sale. And has been said, it'll be about $400m US perhaps less a discount for the fact the jigsaw is incomplete or if something has been done with the patent rights similar to Benitec's CSIRO deals.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reply to: cobra on Thursday 13/03/08 11:29am

Cobra,

 

PYC.ASX has significant "big pharma" interest and exposure to it's drug discovery platform technology, already. The novel science behind Phylomers has been detailed in the seminal Nature paper by Prof Watt. A number of technology enhancements - phylomer library and blocker screening - the recent deal with the automated testing company in Germany - build on this science. They even have a number of therapeutics in preclinical around inflamation control - some of which they own, others as jv's.

 

Inflammation is complex - a successful drug in this space will be a "super-blockbuster".

 

What else is needed to do a "big" deal with "big pharma". Toxicity and dosage work ... yeah right ... phylomer compounds are simply dosed, they are screened in living cells and toxicity effects are known early and the drugs themselves are easily manufactured, are highly pure and stable (compare the nightmare that mAB's need to overcome).

 

If a number of deals are not already on the table, right now, I would be shocked.

 

This recent PR activity is an attempt to shore up the collapsing share price. The recent market sensitivity to risk presents a golden opportunity for investors to build a PYC position at a fraction of the cost the most recent JV tranche were issued at.

 

As always - there are risks. If I felt the probability of a deal was medium term I would be waiting outside the register. I have no insight or information into when or if a deal will be done but assess the situation as a possibility in the short term.

 

/disclosure: I have established a position in PYC.ASX

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those who are unaware of the latest development:

---------------------------------------------------------------

 

PHYLOGICA licenses Phylomer applications to Dynamic

12:45, Monday, 17 March 2008

 

Sydney - Monday - March 17: (RWE Aust Business News) - Phylogica

(ASX:PYC) has a licence agreement with Dynamic Microbials to develop

anti-bacterial applications from Phylogica's technology.

Dynamic will have exclusive rights to develp anti-bacterial,

anti-fungal and anti-prion applications from the Phylomer libraries.

The deal also includes non-exclusive rights to anti-viral

applications.

The companies have formalised Phylogica's significant

shareholding in Dynamic (38pc) and it will receive a royalty on sales of

future products as well as a percentage of other commercialisation

income.

ENDS

 

Copyright ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚© 2008 RWE Australian Business News. All rights reserved.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, and the price falls to an all time low of 10c.

 

This Chairman doesn't know what he's doing or the message just isn't being understood or both.

 

Talk can only get you so far. Sooner or later he has to front up with the results and after more than three years he hasn't.

 

Instead they decide to axe the CEO, blame him and replace him with a couple of venture capitalists. http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/grrr.gif

 

Whats their exit strategy? And whats in it for them?

 

http://www.biopacificventures.com/theteam.aspx

 

http://www.titanbioventures.com/investment_professionals.asp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Guys,

 

Here is an interesting blog extract from Dirk Haussecker, the well known RNAi blogger ... here is relates a small molecules seminar:

 

http://rnaitherapeutics.blogspot.com/2008/...ollaborate.html

 

QUOTE (Dirk Haussecker)

It was with a healthy dose of suspicion that I went today to a presentation by Mike Varney from Genentech on their small molecule operations which is a new addition to the Genentech and which he was spear-heading. Of course, as the pioneer of biotech the first question to be addressed was why Genentech would go into small molecules at all if that was part of the reason why Big Pharma was ailing anyway?

Hearing about the challenges of RNAi delivery ad nauseum, youÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢d think that relative ease of delivery such as by oral bioavailability would be a major motivation, but this was not the case. In the business of treating serious, life-threatening disease with large unmet medical needs, it becomes less relevant if you can go home and take a pill twice a day, or whether you get an intravenous infusion every other week. No, the main rationale provided was that as Genentech scientists dive deep into the biology of disease pathways, they often find themselves with promising drug targets, but which cannot be reached by antibodies. Antibodies are great for targeting cell surface proteins, but useless for intracellular targets whereas small molecules can more easily achieve that feat. Target space is the keyword here, and according to Dr. Varney target space is very limited, so limited so that as a biotech reaches the size of a Genentech or Amgen it has to think about other drug classes while at the same time Big Pharma is expanding into biologics.

 

Sounds like Genentech have never heard of Phylomers http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (wasabibarako @ Thursday 01/05/08 11:22pm)

I thought J&J were half way there, already ...

 

Fact is, if Genentech have a small molecule division based on biologics - small molecule platform technology companies with 280million drug candidates locked up are about to become very valuable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reply to: Enumerate on Thursday 01/05/08 08:36pm

Enumerate: And the shareprice continues to go down/stay at a very low level.... Hopefully, a takeover will come suddenly "out of the blue". Would be nice during May, as I do have PYC as one of my entries in the TIPPING competition and I believe I am the only one having tipped this one. Does not have a great following for sure.

wasa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...