InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

Robert C Jonson

08/21/15 8:29 AM

#231159 RE: md1225 #231158

Why not a regional partner as we've been saying we want?

RCJ
icon url

asmarterwookie

08/21/15 8:33 AM

#231162 RE: md1225 #231158

35% ownership of PPHM? 175MIL / 500 mil

We can only hope...

wook
icon url

101Theory

08/21/15 8:52 AM

#231168 RE: md1225 #231158

Not just for one partner but for multiple more tea like. Not good to sign one deal till 2 or 3 deals can all be worked at once. PR firm was the last step so no leaks when Peregrine blows her top.
icon url

masshysteria

08/21/15 8:54 AM

#231171 RE: md1225 #231158

I'm in the same camp.

Asking for such a significant increase in authorized shares for cash needs 24 months + down the line can only be associated with some sort of trouble - which greatly diverges from every business trend or message Peregrine has been sharing. Of course, they could be planning to start multiple self-funded phase III trials and go for the shares/ATM faster - but that would be the wrong move as time is not on their side and a small company will heavily struggle managing multiple concurrent (and they need to be large to provide value) phase III trials.

Coupled with what appears as good progress on product/business development horizon - I read this as North, MD and many others - an entry point for a partner. May be contingent on 1st/2nd look outcomes to actually execute - but positioned for success once outcomes are proven.

If I'm looking at it from BP perspective - it could be the best balance point for risk/reward. Peregrine wants untold fortunes - and if they can prove it works, fortunes are deserved. Commit to paying big money and get in the driver seat - with a contingency that lets you out if the product doesn't deliver.

This can't go on for ever - combo of signs, strange activities and intense quiet may be telling.

Best,

MH