NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[biosectinvestor]

Hello No2Koolaid,

I think you’re presuming CRL is more expert at this business. I don’t think that is the case. CRL bought Cognate because they were not in this particular business at all. Advent was part of Cognate and a spin-off, ergo just as expert.

Since that time, NWBO and Advent have been working on commercial manufacturing of DCVax-L, CRL has never launched a commercial product like this ever.

Advent, NWBO and Flaskworks also have the tools, including new manufacturing tools that they are seeking to put into operation. Not only is CRL not experienced with this new technology, they would be only doing manual most likely, at least in the beginning and giving them Flaskworks opens up IP risks of various sorts since their business is to manufacture products and NWBO has a unique commercial advantage. Reverse engineering is always a risk when you deal with a contract manufacturer seeking business from other companies. Give away that advantage and the core protected IP for DCVac and other vaccines NWBO might role out later is much, much more difficult to claim or protect.

There is no patent for a cell type. The patent for mixing certain things together to make this drug are also aging rapidly, but putting it all into a machinery that is customized and makes the vaccine starting at 10x more productively and then likely increases from there if NWBO controls the IP and continuously improves, a general and basic requirement of companies that manufacture their products, would mean that NWBO’s technology advantage over start-ups in the field would have some real substance. The only real patents in this area are process patents, so the more they get and build on top of their current patents, the thicker the patent field.

Most likely, this business will be partnered or sold in a few years, so not protecting those IP rights would reduce the buyout value.

That doesn’t mean they don’t have CRL on contract for overflow and back-up as the company has said. I was one of the people explaining that was in the cards for a few years now including because it was in the risk section of their annual reports. But the requirement is also about regulators wanting redundancy, not necessarily the plan to scale for all time. They will most likely want to build Sawston, because that builds the most shareholder value, maintains the IP and let’s them continuously improve the manufacturing process. CRL is not the cutting edge option, it would be a fallback to scale initially, manually, and also a fallback if there are issues at the Sawston plant.

But it’s not the best option nor the primary option in any of the disclosure documents. The risk section said that they had these options if a regulator required it, and since both plants can cover for each other, the reason for such a requirement is more likely as a fail safe and for faster early scaling than as a permanent solution.

The company has done a great job of modular using the manufacturing, separating it out, and making it scalable in the process. I do not doubt that they will do it well. But nothing suggests they intend to rely primarily on CRL. I know over on Reddit there is someone who false suggested that CRL was going to buy or partner with NWBO instead of big pharma. Those notions make little sense commercially. So there are a lot of ideas people float that have no real likelihood of ever happening that appeal to retail investors who don’t understand and these theories are not well thought out.

Anyway, I appreciate the comment. Have a great day.