Marker Therapeutics Inc (MRKR)

[Phantom Lord]

Has Marker set up the manufacturing operation so common shareholders benefit directly?

This has been discussed here and by the company themselves. They had a few different options when deciding on their manufacturing process. They could have used a CMO or built a brand new facility from the ground up. Building from the ground up was probably never going to happen (way too expensive) and while they could have used a CMO this would have taken a lot of the control out of their hands. They chose their "pods-based" approach because it was the most cost efficient up front and would fulfil their needs for the AML trial and allow them to quickly and easily scale up to accommodate future trials. Additionally, in order for the AML trial to be pivotal most of the product used in the trial needs to be manufactured in the same facility that the final approved product will be manufactured in. The easiest way to fulfil this need was to bring manufacturing in house. This directly increases the chance of success which benefits shareholders.

is all the IP solidly in place for success for Marker common should the biological show promise?

Yes. Marker has all rights. The only way they can revert back to Baylor is if Marker fails to fulfill obligations agreed to in the licensing agreement. This includes failing to pay royalties. As long as Marker remains solvent, keeps progressing their trials, and pays all royalties in a timely manner there is little to no risk of the licenses reverting back to Baylor.