% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Amarantus Bioscience Holdings, Inc Message Board

  • jpcalm68 jpcalm68 Mar 11, 2014 3:05 PM Flag

    Misreading Lympro?

    As long as the conventional thesis on Lympro is that it is the necessary source of funding to take AMBS forward, and as long as there's the possibility that AMBS is going to take Lympro forward on their own, we will see downward pressure. I know many would like to see an upfront agreement on Lympro and think a refusal to do so as just stubborn and greedy. Bankerman is right when he says that taking Lympro forward on their own is a huge undertaking and will take a lot of money. Just look into diagnostic start ups like BGMD and you can see just how hard it is.

    I see a different possibility regarding Lympro. I think AMBS sees Lympro as a big enough of a deal that they want to develop it to a certain degree. They possess (at least) three distinct pathways to funding this development: JV with Eltoprozine, JV with Phenoguard, and MANF data coupled with selling shares (on a number of fronts: ie. diabetes, PD, RP etc. that can lead to a pps pop that allows for dilutive financing at substantially good prices (hypothetically, raising 10 million to drive Lympro at .50 a share, or 20 million shares, would be a good deal, imo)).

    Lympro has the potential to be a massive money-maker that can provide all the funding AMBS would ever need to drive MANF for the next decade. But not if it is given away for a fraction of its value.

    The bottom line for me is that perhaps AMBS isn't in a rush to nail down a Lympro JV because there are alternative pathways to funding and a whole continuum of types of partnerships and markets to be explored. What's more, Lympro development itself isn't a binary option: ie. either someone does it for AMBS or AMBS does it alone. There's a vast territory between those two extremes. From what GC says it sounds like AMBS is trying to find a sweet spot of partnering and control.

    At any rate, my basic thought is that it's possible that many folks are misreading Lympro.

    All imho

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • bhuston77 Mar 11, 2014 3:15 PM Flag

      This is all well and good as long as GC establishes a credible path to do so. Yesterday’s news was mixed. I’m glad GC now has control of dilution, but the fact remains is that more dilution is coming. Shares were ~100M a year ago and now are around 760M with more coming…maybe as high as 900M depending on how much draw down GC takes. Meanwhile, only fluff PRs about progress. The promise of milestones needs to give way to actual announcements that milestones have been achieved. It hasn’t happened. Will it?

      • 1 Reply to bhuston77
      • I agree. GC wasn't kidding when he began that recent blog post with the old, "If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen." He's putting us through a bit of a squeeze and that's why I gave a pretty substantial nod to Bankerman. If we don't get additional funding and they are going Lympro alone we are in for a tough road for the next 12 months.

        Again, my point is that AMBS has a lot more going on than MANF needing Lympro. It's much more dynamic and fluid than that. There's more than one way to get to the gold.

0.052-0.005(-8.77%)3:15 PMEDT