I would hate to see us sell DCVax-L in return for royalty income, which normally isn't more than percentages in the teens. I would much prefer a BP buying a percentage of the company, and perhaps a percentage of the vaccine itself, but not more than 30% at most. In such an agreement we'd be receiving billions up front for the stock they're taking in the company as well as the percentage of the vaccine they'd own, but we'd see the bulk of the revenue from sales, while our partner would see the percentage they'd agreed to. Our partner might earn more because of owning stock in a rapidly appreciating company than if they owned the vaccine and paid us royalties. Essentially the partner would be in the drivers seat, they'd have at least one seat on the board and with the percentage they own and some Institutional support, it would be almost impossible to defeat them in a vote.
I believe the billions the partner would pay in such an arrangement would provide all the funding needed for the follow on trials to expand DCVax-L's label as well as fully supporting DCVax-Direct trials. If we're right about our technology working in many solid cancers the share price would grow dramatically with each new bit of added evidence that it has benefits in many cancers. Off label use will grow dramatically and insurance will pay with the added proof of benefits.
Our vaccines could potentially bring in tens to hundreds of billions annually, wouldn't you rather see say 70% of all that rather than royalty percentages in the mid teens?
Gary
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
