Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Steve, that's a negative....crickets on my last 2 questions.
And interesting catch comparing the two presentations. I had earlier overlooked that small, but possibly critical language. What we do know is that pathway 1 presented the "biological burden" noted by Dr. Hsu which forced the exploration of alternative approaches. Per Mar presentation they appeared to be moving out w/scale up at CDMO 2 for an enhanced alternative approach. Now this should remain a bacterial approach as per EA in the annual letter to shareholders he noted that they have been exploring a new enzyme for the enhanced process/pathway 2 which could also be applied to baseline microbial pathway 1.
I cannot answer why GMP batch production at CDMO would even be commented on as if it were an option. At this point I was under the impression that we were only waiting on the cost and yield details of the new enhanced pathway 2 approach as they finalized the parameters for batch manufacture. It is unnerving to see "if needed" as opposed to "CDMO 2 or alternative CDMO partner" thus implying manufacturing w/a caveat that they may ID a better partner to produce the goods. They have no in-house scaling capabilities to even satisfy their trial's API requirement.
I get that they have to officially release this news, but it's the least impactful PR dropped this year and a waste of a news alert.
It's like hey, we finally found 22 healthy Dutch volunteers willing to let us glob topical gel on their bodies for two weeks.
Give me a biosynthesis update.
Negative. There's a claim that they still use him for some consultancy work, but I can't find anything tied to him being active since 2018.
I dug up their SEDI filings and he still holds a large amount of shares/options. It appears that he was "compensated for services" back in Jan of '18. That confirms he was no longer employed by the company at that time and they paid him in shares (250k) for something.
Filed 2018-01-09
Tx date 2018-01-08 $IN
InMed Pharmaceuticals Inc. Hossain, Sazzad
5 - Senior Officer of Issuer
Direct Ownership
Common Shares
46 - Compensation for services $-562,500
-250,000 vol
$2.25 each 3,007,500
The good Dr. Hossain departed InMed to go get paid w/his new state of the art fractional distillation system.
https://entouragebiosciences.com/
Exactly and it won't be pretty. As HB said a "toxic loan" is almost the only inevitable piece of guaranteed news for them in the coming mo's. I've also done some financing scenarios like you've noted below and it will be incredibly ugly. Eight Cap paid a premium to today's prices and any new financing partner will demand bottom basement terms and InMed will have little leverage to counter. The Kool Aid drinkers really can't see the forest through the trees and continue to celebrate this company's delays. Odd.
I'm not sure why anyone would consider InMed exploring "several" biosynthetic pathways great progress for a company targeted to commercialize this year. And those cost models, you mean the ones that Mr. Adams reported to be ready to communicate to shareholders in Dec? It will be just another "couple weeks" into the summer and you'll still be waiting. Now if you said they're making great progress on continued delays we'd surely agree on that.
Some people just never learn Matilda, or perhaps simply refuse to. InMed is going to dilute the heII out of this stock in the next quarter. Mark my words. Their terms will be terrible given the current SP and what they need to fund on the biosynthesis and EB programs this year.
And "undervalued" he says. Based on what? A rare skin disease trial and a biosynthesis program they can't commercialize. They may actually be overvalued at these levels.
InMed compensates Edison for their coverage. There's almost zero path to financing outside of dilution this yr. Not a matter of if, but when and how bad.
Yes, even for a small biotech developing novel technologies they're just painfully slow. So slow that missing milestones across all of the programs seems to be the only thing that they're accomplishing. EA is also sneaky in the way he'll slightly modify the language in presentation briefings from one to the next in an attempt to camouflage the repetitive can kicking.
I've sent a couple of recent inquiries since the call to our new IR spokesperson Mr. Payne, but I'm not holding my breath for any response. Mark my words the next NR will be financing news and as we know it will not be pretty. At this point I'd just really appreciate any honest data sets on biosynthesis. Outside of the biological burden mention in last yr's call, we have no clue what exactly happened that led to an exploration of path #2. To complicate things even further, we now have "several" paths that we're exploring. Whaaa? I mean this is critical info and changes everything from time lines to addtl R&D expenditures to other variables. Stakeholders aren't asking for the keys to the castle to want a little more information on such a radical change in the program. People should be demanding more transparency at this stage. Maybe they will once they dilute us again and reduce everyone's investment by adding another quarter billion shares.
HB my guess would be either Purisys or Teewinot
**Financing** Anyone following this company/investment closely understands that they will need another round of financing by or before the summer. One thing I don't understand is how so many people can scream that this is such a great price to add to right now when they're literally staring down another round of financing at horrendous SP levels. From their own MD&A filing in Dec "The ability for the Company to materially develop its research and development programs beyond the end of our current fiscal year (June) is subject to the raising of additional capital."
Given that they have no drug candidates mature enough to generate a partnership investment from pharma rule that path out. Given that they earlier said bioinformatics is not currently licensable one can also rule that path to revenue out. Biosynthesis will be lucky to be online by the end of the calendar yr. That means expect really dilutive financing to get through current R&D efforts. Better to wait this out.
HB, here was a past PR on the partnership w/Pharmaseed.
https://www.reuters.com/article/brief-inmed-pharmaceuticals-signs-agreem/brief-inmed-pharmaceuticals-signs-agreement-with-pharmaseed-to-develop-inm-750-idUSFWN1JA0CZ
FWIW, I thought the call was disappointing and of little value. Even more biosynthesis pathways being explored means one thing....delays. Nothing left to pump in the short term if they can't drop juicy NR on biosynthesis. INM-755 is on an incredibly slow PH1 journey. Next piece of news will be the new financing vehicle.
https://filecache.investorroom.com/mr5ircnw_inmedpharma/278/InMed%20Corporate%20Slides%20-%20FINAL%202020-02-11.pdf
Shareholders should expect a detailed explanation of why they chose the alternative process for biosynthesis. If the biological burden in path #1 was not overcome and they are pivoting to an alternative process for the program at minimum this means more delays to commercialization.
Exactly my point Steve. CDMO partner/s are likely not going to be household names so why even ask when the likelihood of response is <10%. Hsu's comment on the call last yr was IMO one of the most critical / concerning data points that I've heard them communicate to stakeholders and to date we still do not have an answer. That is IMO the most critical piece of info that people should want answered. Cost models are also irrelevant if they can't scale the bacterial approach. I think too many are either assuming that they've cracked that nut or just too ignorant to understand the implications of this burden. Per the letter to shareholders..."In the coming weeks, we expect to have a clear indication as to the commercial yield and cost structure of our current biosynthesis process." Well where's the beef EA?
I listened to that summer update call a couple of times and think Hsu honestly walked into sharing that concerning piece of data w/out a blessing from leadership to address it. Even his tone changed as he tried to control what he shared on the subject. He's the exact reason we don't let our engineers and scientists participate in biz development briefings. Those guys are just too dam* honest.
Will there be any major questions answered in Friday's call? Likely not. More of the same old story can be expected which will include only fractional data points shared w/the group followed by pre-approved questions to be answered with corporate spin from paid analysts like Edison lobbing softballs. The FB group isn't any better w/the list of questions that I saw. Saw no hard questions driving to specific sequenced responses. "Who is your secret partner?" Really?!? Like all of a sudden EA is going to just offer that up on your terms.
Hard data points are rarely shared. It will be a lot of "we will continue optimizing fermentation parameters with our CDMO partner/s"....ssshhh secret partner cannot be named. "We are close to finalizing our cost models and batch yields"....absolutely no cost or batch data revealed. "We are making great progress on our evaluation for other indications of our INM-755 formulation".....no other indications mentioned.
Back to our regular scheduled yawner
Well kids the pump is on. Let's hope this is the ride up to warrants, artificial pump or not.
I would have to say that Kg quantities would fill that large bag. We don't know their cost structure, quality, etc, but they claim to be on-line with orders and none of us can dispute that with any data. We also don't know if InMed will ever commercialize. They're clearly having their issues maturing this platform as well. Maybe it will be the algae guys that surprise everyone.
Something is brewing besides CBN at InMed if they traded another mil+ volume on the TSX today. Please surprise me and drop something major on the biosyn program.
The bio-identical vs synthetic is a valid argument that some therapeutic providers may care about more than others. The bacteria vs yeast platform is irrelevant to the research entities and/or pharma co's as long as $$ and purity are good. I like that InMed is in an unclogged area when compared to yeast delivery, but can they and will they produce? They've hit hurdles and this is no longer a secret thanks to Eric Hsu's honest update on the Biz update call. I hope they've cleared that hurdle.
Let's not speculate on if Teewinot's cannabinoids are cost effective, highest purity, or anything else for that matter as we all have no clue. All that I can say for a fact is that they have real IP/patents and currently InMed has 0. I can also say that they were first to offer biosynthesized cannabinoids commercially. Quality, cost, etc are of course unknowns. AT least the clock is finally ticking down on who in this rather large and growing field (biosynthesized cannabinoids) is going to succeed.
Facts are facts whether you want to believe them or not. So you're saying their global news releases on biosynthetically produced cannabinoids are just one big conspiracy? Uh...sure dude.
To Guitar...CannSynthesis, Teewinot's biosynthetic program, IS currently producing and offering CBN. This information is all right there in front of your face. I'll again repost the article which is now old news.
https://www.biospace.com/article/releases/teewinot-announces-availability-of-cannabinol-for-commercial-cannabinoid-market/
The positive developments just keep coming for TBP. A great year is lined up for them and happy to be a part of it.
Worth noting Teewinot already has this rare cannabinoid CBN offered via their biosynthetic platform as a commercially available API in Kg quantities.
https://www.biospace.com/article/releases/teewinot-announces-availability-of-cannabinol-for-commercial-cannabinoid-market/
It's paid for click bait. There's nothing of substance hearing EA talk about the same thing for the 100th time. Post me a patent approval. Post me a real partner. Post me a confirmed biosynthetic pathway. Post me something freaking tangible. Everything else is just the same redundant nonsense.
The recent interview was simply a paid for puff piece. Nothing more.
Monster day today for industry peers Tetra Bio Pharma and Willow. Tetra most notably on news just this afternoon that Health Canada approved their topical CBD drug and they are now a bonafied pharmaceutical co.
Yes, that's the only benefit of doubt that I still give them. It's a new frontier that they're exploring, but it's been a rather disappointing few yrs watching them continue to take one step forward and two steps back. That doesn't even account for the pipeline reprioritization events. I am truthfully concerned about the biosynthesis program and that's the only reason I'm even here.
I agree 100% and am also concerned that there's very little that would be received by the market as "pump worthy". EB is what it is and on a longer clinical calendar than I would have liked. It would have to be a pump from the biosynthesis program. A industry leading CDMO partner (unlikely) or the approved patent for the bacterial method and new data supporting this method going into batch scale-up.
I'm still not parked in the it's a scam camp, however what is apparent is that they're really struggling to mature their therapeutic pipeline as well as biosynthesis commercialization. They are slowly proving to be a team with great potential, but may never realize it as they seem to not be able to make the sausage. Pipeline candidates and their respective clinical dates have changed multiple times in the past 5 yrs. They've made late changes to formulations. Their novel ocular delivery system was supposed to be a game changer now there's concern they may be abandoning it. We've seen first hand how they tweak their presentation milestones to paint the picture that they are hitting their objectives when they really just keep missing the mark and kicking the can down the road.
They keep everyone on their toes in suspense with their secret partners. Secret CDMO partners, secret pharmaceutical partners, etc. I don't actually think they have any partners at all. They are going to miss another year of warrants, raise more cash via dilutive means and set the company back only further with additional commercialization delays to biosynthesis all while watching the share count double to get them the cash they'll need to get through '20 and beyond.
Adams, please orchestrate another great pump by May to head fake folks so that I can shave my position down significantly.
Good job reposting Steve. Admin/s will keep deleting it.
It's obviously going to get worse in the near-term and one would have to have blinders on to think otherwise. Even if they didn't hit the brickwall on biosynthesis last yr they would still have required a cash injection prior to any revs coming online. The timing never lined up.
Unless they can pull off a non-dilutive raise like their industry peer TBP it's almost certain this next round of financing will almost certainly crush them and their shareholders. A non-dilutive option is unlikely as they don't have one mature product in their pipeline to offer via a royalty/licensing model. License what? They're running out of mojo and they'll need an incredibly high number of new shares issued only to raise a few bucks at current levels. Between Q4/19 and Q1/20 it's looking like they're going from bad to worse rather quickly.
I agree that for InMed, execution of biosynthesis program will be the only likely near term (<1 yr) catalyst. The broader market doesn't care much about a rare disease (small patient pool) like EB and as much as I'd celebrate finally seeing some IP secured (biosyn, ocular) I don't see it driving the SP very far north.
My prediction is that they'll need more $$ before biosynthesis comes online, if ever. They themselves dropped the honest data point during the biz update about hitting a biological burden during scale-up....in InMed terms that usually means years of addtl research and test. Hoping they can muster something for a nice pump in an effort to capitalize on June warrants and I'll shave my position by 50-60%.
The same can be said about many of the micro / small biotechs in this space that haven't had any bump on the securing of IP through new patents. Outside of EMBI, Revive is another. Multiple patents and two recent orphan drug designations and hardly any pop from it. That's what confuses many closely tracking InMed that believe that just because they entered trials or finally get one approved patent that it will result in a big bump. Not the case in many other instances.
InMed Pharma...in a "transformative" stage since 2015 yet still have very little to show for all the hype.
Are we rich yet?
I'll agree w/HB in that Adams is ultimately responsible in his role as CEO for blessing any CMO/CDMO partners. People always celebrating the top notch team that he has around him, but to be honest if they're not selecting proven CDMOs in favor of non established CDMOs just trying to get their s_hit together that falls on his shoulders.
This was "news" over a week ago Tom. Try to keep up.
So would you say that if you had led 8 Capital's financing venture in InMed your leadership team would be pleased with your results? A complete loss of warrant capitalization and a paper loss of almost 75%. Let's just say investors were thirsty in 2016 and completely parched for some results in 2019.
He really did time that well. The team at 8 Cap must've wanted to strangle EA for that disrespectful move.
Well Tom Eight Capital today has a massive paper loss on their investment. If you think they're thrilled that their investment is worth about a quarter of what they paid for it and they watched their warrants expire worthless you're not paying great attention. Eight Cap's investment will be worth even less if InMed secures a new financing deal at today's SP. Averaging down in the face of new financing would be a very amateur move, but good luck w/that.