Cytodyn Inc (CYDY)

[BlackDoggie]

I'll do this once more, then you can have whatever last word you like. Just don't use the word "attitude" - it's more like contempt. Words have meaning, and I like to be precise with them.

Reason I give no value for the test device is: They don't have one to sell right now as they have no FDA approval to my knowledge and I see no progress here.

That's an interesting take. I'm assuming that you also assign a zero value to leronlimab - and all other clinical-stage drugs - since they're not currently a salable product with FDA approval? Someone really should alert the entire pharmaceutical market of this new truth. Isn't this the entire purpose of discounted cash flow analysis? You know... the bread and butter work of an analyst? If you're assigning zero value based on lack of progress, that's just silly. I haven't seen any progress on the BLA since they filed the pre-clinical portion a little bit back, better assign zero value for lack of progress, right? You don't even know the device pathway well enough to know the proper name of the pre-market filing without looking it up. Once more, just incredibly disingenuous.

Even having one approved, please peak at competitive companies with test devices, how hard that biz currently is. Rarely any of them is doing great sadly.

I'm left to assume that proper usage of inferential statistics isn't your thing. Let's assume that your statement that most companies with medical test devices aren't doing well is correct prima facie. The problem with then assigning zero value to an individual medical device based on this information is that you happen to have additional, differentiating (for better or worse) information on this particular device, thus you can do better analysis than simply ascribing the characteristics of the population. Here's an example. I find 80% of posts on this board useless. If I were to pick a random post, it would then have a 20% chance of being useful. However, if I knew that I was picking one of your posts, it would have a 0% chance of being useful. You don't get the 20% assumption from the population, because I know more about the post - I know that it's from you. See how that works? Inferential statistics are only useful when assigning probabilities to a random observation from a previously described population.

TL:DR - It's a meaningless argument here that most medical devices that are tests of some sort aren't doing well. Sloppy on your part, again. At best.

Another reason I ignore the value of this: It is not covered by anyone anyways. Ask the new R&R whether they give a penny on it. Answer is: No.

Name one clinical stage device/test - or drug, for that matter - that has insurance reimbursement. Again, just an absolutely meaningless argument. Sloppy at best, intentionally intellectually dishonest and disingenuous at worst.

Finally, better attempt at a red herring here, but still off the mark:

just for the sake of your argument, I very much laid out the proportional differences of prospective valuation of going alone vs full-partnership (licensing out).

It is in our old spreadsheet for months and - if you really want, you could use the Rodman & Renshaw analysis referenced, which does a similar proportional valuation. Their (old) value metric is published as 'full partnership' only, FYI.

So the pure royalty valuation is laid out, depending on the deal. And historical data also referenced indicates that at least 40-50% of the expected revenue would be initially required to 'go it all alone'.

That's fantastic, but the conversation in question from February was simply asking "how much would it cost to build a sales team and go it alone?" Your response was "company XYZ needed $50-150mm to build a sales team and continue developing its pipeline." The fact that you didn't see the need to differentiate between whether it took $50mm or $150mm - or somewhere in between - and how much of that money was needed for pipeline development - did they only need $10mm to build a sales team and the rest was for pipeline development? - tells me that you never had any intention of engaging the conversation honestly.


I'll give you one thing, you have thick skin. I can't imagine how much it hurts to repeatedly bang your head against a wall like this. See you in a month or so when I feel like taking time out of my day to call you out again.