News Focus
News Focus
icon url

MI Dendream

09/24/21 8:46 AM

#404001 RE: anders2211 #403993

When it comes to Cognate, my opinion differs greatly on what transpired from what I see happening with regards to Advent. What I see happening in the industry all of the time is that companies frequently deal with uncertainty by outsourcing components of the business. If a company starts a new division but isn’t certain it will be a success or don’t think it will be a long term play, they often hire contract Sales and Medical Affairs for example. Even the big guys do this.

Right now and for the past several years, they have been starved for cash. Where the blame lies is irrelevant moving forward. Yet, they needed stable European manufacturing as well as leverage with CRL/Cognate and potential bidders. They could hire a company like Franhouffer or an Advent. So long as we are not overpaying for that service, I do not have a problem with the conflict of interest. I get it if transparency is your concern here regarding details of contracts, but I am not certain that I should be privy to all of those details. I also understand why LP would prefer to put additional investment into another business rather than give those profits to a thrid party entity. Again, so long as the fees paid are reasonable, I am okay with this. I assume that FH and Cognate at a minimum were used as reference. They may have even approached Merk…who knows. I don’t expect to know the details of an RFP. By cash burn rate over the past few years, at bird’s eye view, it looks to me like the Advent partnership has been far more economical than Cognate and reasonably low overall. I am not in finance, so this is not my area of expertise.

I do know that NWBO did not and could not at reasonable rates build enough capital to go it alone and hire the resources needed to get UK manufacturing off of the ground…not without severe dilution once again. So, I am ok with the route taken
icon url

MI Dendream

09/24/21 9:02 AM

#404007 RE: anders2211 #403993

BTW Anders, I think it is just fine to raise doubts and criticism of management and be long the stock. I do that myself often. Some of the time, I am not even aligned to the criticism that I raise, but I am very interested in the response from the board. This board is amazingly educational. Even rarer, I raise what is criticism initially but when you follow the logic through to the end you may see that it is not negative at all but rather more evidence to the positive.

Which is why I ask where you are going with this line of questioning? How does it end for you? I almost always begin with the end in mind which I assume you do as well. What is the end result of this for you?

Both sides have spoken, the arguments are now circular. What is your play?