Replies to post #440149 on NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[skitahoe]

Mav,

Whether it's a buyout, or a partnership, which I'd prefer, whoever is interested should already know about the trial results in depth. In fact, I would suspect that they would have had signed confidentiality agreements with NWBO essentially since data lock occurred and they've been scrutinizing them ever since. Many believe that Merck is the one, but actually their could be many.

In reality, an agreement may already be in place, but it would be triggered by something, it could be a certain share price being achieved, or it could be a specific event, like one or more regulatory approvals. The point is that everything could be in place, but nothing would ever be said until the triggering event occurred. Meanwhile, if the company needed certain things to occur before such an announcement could be made, if they required shareholder concurrence, such as an increase in the authorized shares, that too would have to happen previously. If a shareholder vote was required for the acquisition or partnership, that would have to occur once it was announced.

Many years ago investors knew that IMGN had a confidentiality agreement in anticipation of a partner for a drug in clinical development, but when trial product was lost in a freezer failure it was delayed for over a year while new product was made. No one knew with certainty who the partner was, but when it was announced, it was who the majority believed from over a year previously. The drug was abandoned a few years later when an improved version was put into the clinic, then it too was abandoned.

I believe that the confidentiality agreement was announced initially, but during a quiet period I don't know that even that would be acknowledged, and also that was in a Nasdaq company where more may have to be announced. Confidentially agreements that never come to fruition don't get announced as terminated, when nothing happens for years investors make assumptions that may, or may not be true. In biotech terms months, even years for things happening are often referred to as "SOON".

Gary

[dmb2]

I recall a small Canadian bio several years ago pull off the uplist/RS/raise all at one time and was bought out shortly after, but there are many ways this can go. There are always issues which need to be worked out in a buyout, in this case due to the tiny size of NWBO the only one that is obvious is valuation.
I see no risk to a BP buying this technology to just shelve it because if the P3 has strong positive data as expected there will be many efforts to utilize DC science springing up and I don't think a BP will pay a hefty price to create a dead asset when their own IP clocks are running and the asset has huge potential value to its owner.
Pfizer utilized the partnership model a few times successfully in past years as did Roche and others who did not want to commit large capital outlays. In this case I agree a buyout is the preferred method assuming a valuation agreement can be reached. On the upside there is huge potential to the use of the platform in oncology. On the downside there is limited IP protection. So, a BP would need to assess how they can position DCVax in the short term for long term development. NWBO has done a good job of enabling that potential with such long term, rich data from this P3 to expand from.
I would love to be in a scientific review group meeting of a BP discussing the development needs vs the potential of this platform to be applied across the spectrum of oncology areas.

All my opinion of course, GLTA