Simply stated: this puzzles the heck out of me.
I had assumed that the last offering was totally sufficient to cover the trial to it's conclusion with all the assorted odds and ends........and ....enough left over to actually fund a marketing plan.
Those with a keener understanding of what is going on.....what is your conjecture? thanks in advance.
The potential loan package....?
Forum rules
- Comments must be civil and on topic
- Back up claims with evidence/reasoning/sources (posting links is allowed)
- No commercials/harassment/spam
- Comments must be civil and on topic
- Back up claims with evidence/reasoning/sources (posting links is allowed)
- No commercials/harassment/spam
Re: The potential loan package....?
To the statisticians who have analyzed the results... any chance that we may see clinically relevant and statistically significant results sooner? If the study was overpowered to actually have a significantly powered interim analysis... would that be a driver for recent fund raising?
-
- Posts: 1665
- Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 5:13 pm
Re: The potential loan package....?
Hi Ashah, I am not sure getting a 9 % rate in this era of low interest is so great. I don’t think Geron has some bombshell to drop. More likely I think we will see that enrollment time lines will be pushed out due to COVID and the loan will ensure completion of the PIII studies. The need for it continues to suggest no partner is close by. I think the ASH offerings may give us some window on where things are and where things are appears to be somewhere in 2023/4. Regards, bp
Re: The potential loan package....?
BP.,
Totally respect your viewpoint. 9% in absolute terms ... not a good idea. I have a buisness, I know. If my returns on my work (technology services) is, say, 10% returns, then paying 9% to bank = very bad idea. Of course, if the need is only temporary and short term, I may compromise.
However, in biopharma, the returns are 90% or higher ... so in that scenario a 9% rate is closer to the acceptability range.
The issue always is - compared to what? Is 9% return undesirable... yes or no ... compared to what options. I think, as an investor (and perhaps we have NEA to thank), a non-dilutive financing at 9% is more desirable versus a dilutive financing when the stock has upside greater than 9%.
So, from a pure financial standpoing, I think this is very desirable standpoint. The other thought is...why? If the company currently has over $100M in cash, the interest rates are not going up anytime soon - then why have this credit facility NOW? I suspect this is in anticipation of near term even which may place heavy cash flow burden. And... as an entrepreneur I know, always dig your well before you are thirsty.
So from one entrepreneur to another... this is to me, one of the most positive signals. Note - that they did seem to execute the non-dilutive option in the past ... hence the timing is interesting.
From a science / clinical standpoint, the question to relect is - this is the greatest confidence that the management has opted to showcase on its potential drug candidate! I love it... particularly for the patients who be assured that science will prevail over politics/finance and stock manipulation.
Totally respect your viewpoint. 9% in absolute terms ... not a good idea. I have a buisness, I know. If my returns on my work (technology services) is, say, 10% returns, then paying 9% to bank = very bad idea. Of course, if the need is only temporary and short term, I may compromise.
However, in biopharma, the returns are 90% or higher ... so in that scenario a 9% rate is closer to the acceptability range.
The issue always is - compared to what? Is 9% return undesirable... yes or no ... compared to what options. I think, as an investor (and perhaps we have NEA to thank), a non-dilutive financing at 9% is more desirable versus a dilutive financing when the stock has upside greater than 9%.
So, from a pure financial standpoing, I think this is very desirable standpoint. The other thought is...why? If the company currently has over $100M in cash, the interest rates are not going up anytime soon - then why have this credit facility NOW? I suspect this is in anticipation of near term even which may place heavy cash flow burden. And... as an entrepreneur I know, always dig your well before you are thirsty.
So from one entrepreneur to another... this is to me, one of the most positive signals. Note - that they did seem to execute the non-dilutive option in the past ... hence the timing is interesting.
From a science / clinical standpoint, the question to relect is - this is the greatest confidence that the management has opted to showcase on its potential drug candidate! I love it... particularly for the patients who be assured that science will prevail over politics/finance and stock manipulation.
-
- Posts: 1665
- Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 5:13 pm
Re: The potential loan package....?
Hi Ashah, If a partner or approval were close, the company could anticipate income and would not need the loan. So I am forced to conclude neither is happening soon. Also the 9 % rate is not exactly one the indicates the bank thinks this is a low risk loan. Since we know a PIP has not yet been granted per Geron's response to a YMB board poster, it seems unlikely that a filing for MA has occurred. So we are looking for 270 day wait from there.
-
- Posts: 128
- Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2020 5:48 pm
Re: The potential loan package....?
The most obvious answer(s) in my opinion.....
1) Use the proceeds to launch an AML clinical trial.
2) Extra funds to support MF and/or MDS trials (more sites, extended time, etc)
3) Acquire a promising new compound. I think they would pursue #1 before #3, but ???
1) Use the proceeds to launch an AML clinical trial.
2) Extra funds to support MF and/or MDS trials (more sites, extended time, etc)
3) Acquire a promising new compound. I think they would pursue #1 before #3, but ???
-
- Posts: 1665
- Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 5:13 pm
Re: The potential loan package....?
HI, interesting. Re #1, the same delays in recruitment that the MDS and MF trials face would apply, but I would love to see the AML study get off the ground. #2 I hope the timelines do not need to be extended but clearly the effects of COVID can not be underestimated. Re # 3, given the extensive patent just posted last month. https://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2020/0283461.html could there be a hole in Geron's IP that might be addressed by a company like MAIA (hat tip to Cheng Ho) per your speculation? (That company would come with the likes of Jerry Shay). Yup, that is seriously wild speculation. More likely some cooperative venture with a potential combination JAK-I inhibitor? Regards, bp