Avid Bioservices Inc (CDMO)

[biopharm]

I think that this possibility "may" be part of partnering talks and my original thought was "Is Big Pharma toooo big to break up?"

There have been other industries where rules are changed and governmental agencies have to force change and actually start breaking up monopolies such as ATT in the 80's.

Is it feasible that "IF" all Big Pharma and the FDA knows that PS is the target and "EVERY" cancer drug will benefit as seen in solid tumors..etc and its all just investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=93404894&txt2find=breast|cancer|immune|diseases[tag]scratching the surface for all "auto-immune diseases"
[/tag], then Peregrine has a problem... but possibly a good problem to have.

Has Big Pharma ever experienced "monopoly" type situations, where only a few top companies controlled the entire market? I would argue absolutely not....but we have never had a "global" check point either involved with any type of cancer treatment ..etc. As always, Big Pharma has always had plenty of $$$ to go around for everyone. Maybe a bit more money goes to the Roche type families... but still a far distant from a monopoly.

So what would all Big Pharma think if "ONE" Big Pharma had the target of PS all wrapped up to themselves? What would the FDA think? I say... since Black Monday that both sides and many others have thought about it and played out the scenario that would happen or maybe I am overthinking it all again?

If PS is the target and it is clinically proven that targeting PS with mostly all cancer drugs and you get at the minimum 200-300% of an advantage, how can the FDA allow any other drug take over SOC ? They can't or I should say they "could" ... but who in their right mind, once the word spreads about "PS targeting" drugs that you would want an inferior immuno-therapy combination drug treatment? All treatmeant paths will ultimately lead to PS targeting treatment.

This leads me to a "monopoly"... and its possible the FDA and Big Pharma sees it as well. Just as many Big Banks were too big to go bust, we certainly don't want to be bailing out Big Pharma... do we?

Solutions:

1) One or more Big Pharma buys out Peregrine:

Pros: Great for one or two Big Pharmas and current shareholders of PPHM cut out their longer term time risk.

Cons: Big Pharmas and could lead to a monopoly.
Bad for all other Big Pharmas that lose out and possibly worst for patients as pricing wouldn't not be competitive? Also bad for current shareholders of PPHM... no way to currently realize the true value of the pipeline.


2) 1 or more partners with Peregrine:

Pros: Again.. great for one or two BP's and current shareholders, as Peregrine is able to reach real value of the PS targeting platform but also there is "some" risk if another target such as PS is found.

Cons: Bad for all other BP's and patients risk less pricing competition and again-- could lead to a monopoly.


3) Peregrine goes it alone (with major $$$ backing either via ATM or someone realizing the value of PS targeting..etc)

Pros: The greatest monopoly concern of them all. One company controlling possibly a very large percentage of Big Pharma.

Cons: This would take a little more time with added risks but the path to the "greatest" return to all shareholders. It "may" be the same time for "one" approval and the first FDA approval..... but to run hundreds of trials in parallel would certainly take much longer unless they partnered. This of patent rights as well... if it takes 4-5 extra years to know "ALL" the indications that PS targeting may be used for.... then thats 4-5 years off of your profits. So maybe we can argue that it may be the most profitable on the front end.... but maybe not so on the back end when Peregrines patent cliff comes due. Probably the largest patent cliff EVER when that time comes.

4) Thinking out of the Box: First-- a value needs to be placed on the PS targeting platform which is the most difficult and if that can be agreed upon by multiple parties, is it possible that the FDA can designate that "Immunotherapy" IS THE SAFEST and BEST TREATMENT GOING FORWARD? ... and designate all treatments to a PS targeting agent ??

Pros: Fees collected by Peregrine by every Big Pharma in the land. This path... is possible and allows Big Pharma to stay in tact so to speak.

Cons: No monopoly or too much power in the hands of one BP or a couple BP's..or a few BP's. The problem is Peregrine does not collect enough money in the short term for all current shareholders, unless somehow the FDA/Big Pharma come up with a new system and everyone kicks in a % to Peregrine... in order to move forward with collecting royalties? I'll get some backlash with this... lol but just throwing out a scenario: the only way I see this working is the upfront payment would be collected by all "SOC" drugs presently and if that SOC gets taken out by another BP... then anytime a new SOC pops up they pay an "upfront" payment... then start paying royalties each time Bavi is used. hey... I tried on that one lol : )

I think we know why partnering talks takes soo long... how the hell can we value this platform ?? Its going to reduce the Big Pharma Jobs/Space either way you cut it and jobs will be lost. Targeting PS may be the only true "immuno-therapy"... period! Who will control PS targeting when all is said and one?