Registered Members Login:
   
Forgotten Your Details? Click Here To Recover +
Welcome To The ShareCafe Community - Talk Shares And Take Stock With Smart Investors - New Here? Click To Register >

4723 Pages (Click to Jump) V   1 2 3 4 > »    
 
  
Reply to this topic

CUV, CLINUVEL PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED
xray
post Posted: Today, 03:10 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 423
Thanks: 723


In Reply To: Frogster's post @ Today, 02:58 PM

Yes that is a bit disturbing.
I would suggest a simple performance plan.
Get the share price to $150 within 3 years and they can all have 1.5 mil shares each (even the cleaning lady at the office for all I care).
But the shares are held in escrow until the share price is $300.


Said 'Thanks' for this post: Verharven  
 
Frogster
post Posted: Today, 02:58 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 601
Thanks: 2134


In Reply To: xray's post @ Today, 02:01 PM

I like the A$7.5bn mkt cap incentivisation bit. It's a demanding hurdle, but gets well rewarded. Multiply the shares price approximately 5 fold from current levels? Sounds good to me.

What I'm not so keen on is what the targets become if we have a recession, and lets face it that's quite possible in the next few years. Under those circumstances, he gets the same reward (number of shares) by outperforming a biotech index by a bit (only 9%!!!), over a calendar quarter. Whats very unclear is what happens if there is a recession which we come out of quickly. Does the switch to the "outperformance" metric stick, or do the targets switch back to mkt cap based ones? Let's say a recession hits in the next 6 months, but immediately thereafter we exit it. If the metrics do not switch back, then essentially there's 3 years left to outperform a bio index for just one quarter. These metrics seem very weak by comparison to the mkt cap. ones.

The other thing that's a bit unclear is where they say they intend to introduce a similar rights scheme for managers. Presumably that's CFO, CSO, LH and maybe others. It's possible to read what they've said as implying the same quantum of shares will be issued as for PW. So, does this bit mean they intend to issue ANOTHER 1.5m shares to non board level management as well?

"Following the Meeting and subject to Shareholder approval of Resolution 4, the Board intends to grant senior management Performance Rights under the Performance Rights Plan as a means to provide further incentivisation for their commitment to the Company’s commercial development under Dr Philippe Wolgen’s management direction. These Performance Rights will have similar or equal Performance Conditions to those attached to the Performance Rights to be granted to Dr Philippe Wolgen upon approval of this Resolutions, to align the interests of senior management with those of shareholders"

I'd like to understand how many shares might apply to this bit, cause 1.5m seems quite a few to me!



--------------------
Dr Wolgen is a magician.
His end game for Scenesse will impress, or even amaze.
En route, along with glimmers of truth, there will be distractions, illusions, sleight of hand and misdirection.
Enjoy the ride.

Said 'Thanks' for this post: xray  
 
LevelHeaded2000
post Posted: Today, 02:49 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 416
Thanks: 975


Why Clinuvel Will Beat the Trend


I remember looking at some studies on biotechs post-approval share price performance. I believe some studies were posted to this forum within the last months. Interesting, it seems in about 70% (if memory serves) the year following approval is generally not good stock performance. There is an important reason why Clinuvel will be in the 30% that are successful the year following approval.

The reason being and something that I don't remember being emphasized in the study is share dilution, debt, and negative earnings. It is not that investors suddenly flee biotechs post-approval. It is that companies do share dilution and continue to have negative earnings and they have too large debt loads. THIS is the cause for the majority of biotechs to perform poorly the year following approval. Commercialization happens too slowly for them to outrun the debt / bad spending which leads to a poor financial position, dilution, etc.

For that reason, I think that Clinuvel will have a much more positive post-approval year than a typical biotech since the financial position of Clinuvel is better. It is because it does not have the debt load, negative earnings, and cavalier management most biotechs have.






Said 'Thanks' for this post: xray  Verharven  
 
xray
post Posted: Today, 02:01 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 423
Thanks: 723


In Reply To: macgyver's post @ Today, 01:37 PM

So Walnut is incentivised to get the share price to $7.5 billion market cap within 3 years (his new contract ending at that stage).
That a share price of around $165.
Sounds tasty.
Get on with it Walnut and make it happen.


 
macgyver
post Posted: Today, 01:37 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 597
Thanks: 512


Going over the performance rights for PW and Co, I found some of these to be a bit soft, as in they are going to issue imminently regardless of outside events . It would take a catastrophic event for some of these not to be issued. But probably for the first time, It’s now a strongly incentivised target to the company to increase shareholder return to the tune of $7.5 billion market cap. This has an air of confidence about it, and it’s pleasing to see a focus on accelerating the growth and ROI from the company. They will have done the sums, and I wonder if this too will be imminently issued in short order rather than over a four year period. Time to ramp up🔥


Said 'Thanks' for this post: xray  
 
Justinian
post Posted: Today, 12:57 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 264
Thanks: 378


In Reply To: johnnytech's post @ Today, 10:46 AM

It really depends on what the endpoint is. For EPP, it was difficult to find any endpoint besides time spent in the sun. For XP, it doesn't have to be time spent outside. It could be how many instances of skin cancer are seen since a fairly significant amount of these are seen in people with XP. The participants wouldn't have to change any of their behaviors or deliberately expose themselves to UV. The placebo group and treatment group could both behave how they would without treatment so the placebo group isn't really any worse off than if they weren't in the trial. This won't work if people have alternative options that almost entirely prevent skin cancer though, since they would just exercise those and there wouldn't be room to see an improvement by using Scenesse. In that case deliberately exposing themselves to UV would be unethical.


Said 'Thanks' for this post: johnnytech  xray  
 


Dr Wally
post Posted: Today, 12:42 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 509
Thanks: 516


In Reply To: seeva222's post @ Yesterday, 10:52 PM

🙈

 
Dr Wally
post Posted: Today, 12:42 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 509
Thanks: 516


In Reply To: seeva222's post @ Yesterday, 10:52 PM

“ How do shorters make money on churn? They sell shares to drive the stock down and cover... when? How does that covering not drive the stock up? ”

Sorry Seeva I’ll have to start charging if I give you further information on this rather convoluted subject of shorting.🤣 There’s plenty of conflicting information online for you to search through you know. That way you can come to your own conclusions on the subject without me confusing you any further. 😬

Would it be stating the obvious that of course the shorting has tapered off now, simply because the SP is way down?

You don’t short a company when the SP has bottomed out do you ? 🤔 That’s when you start buying to return the stock and take off with a quick profit. And with an expensive program you can realise these profits over weeks/months without raising the SP substantially until something gets the SP excited again and this short game can start all over again. 😑



 
Billy Boots
post Posted: Today, 11:44 AM
  Quote Post


Posts: 208
Thanks: 163


In Reply To: Kboy69's post @ Yesterday, 11:49 PM

NICE THOUGHT.

 
johnnytech
post Posted: Today, 10:46 AM
  Quote Post


Posts: 436
Thanks: 855


In Reply To: Verharven's post @ Today, 04:30 AM

It's not about whether or not the placebo is current best practice. It's about what's the potential downside of being in the placebo group. With EPP, I know I'm not contributing to my early death if I'm in the placebo group. But, with XP I would never take that chance because of the potential. I'm not qualified to answer ethics of studies, but I see the ethical boundaries are more grey.

 
 


4723 Pages (Click to Jump) V   1 2 3 4 > » 

Back To Top Of Page
Reply to this topic


You agree through the use of ShareCafe, that you understand and accept the TERMS OF USE.


TERMS OF USE  -  CONTACT ADMIN  -  ADVERTISING