PDA

View Full Version : GEN - A ski slope



Pages : [1] 2 3 4

willy_wonker
11-03-2004, 11:05 AM
Marine. What was the IPO price for GEN? Also, what price did the promoters get the shares at? Just wondering what will happen to this company? How will the survive with such a high cash burn rate and revenue that doesnt even cover half of their expenses. It doesnt look good !

Are there any value in GEN?

Any bio tech gurus out there know if GEN has any products of value?
Why hasnt there been any restructuring to reduc expenditure and management structure?

Disc: NOT a GEN holder

whatsup
11-03-2004, 11:33 AM
WW Sept 2000 listing at $6.00 & $4.6Aust raised $34 mil Kiwi

whatsup
11-03-2004, 11:35 AM
WW sorry went to high of Approx $7.6 after listing !!!! now Q 1 whats its value 2 whats its future!!!!

willy_wonker
17-03-2004, 11:02 AM
GEN is looking worst everyday I look at it.

How low will it go? Will the company survive?

Disc: Not a shareholder

biker
17-03-2004, 11:19 AM
quote:Originally posted by whatsup

WW Sept 2000 listing at $6.00 & $4.6Aust raised $34 mil Kiwi


And they were very hard to get.Glad I didn't persevere and end up with some.

Sid
17-03-2004, 12:06 PM
Market cap is $18m, cash holdings as per todays Herald Genesis story is $23m. This says the market doesn't give Genesis much change of ever turning a profit.
Wonder if Wrightson's will have another look at it.

marinesalvor
17-03-2004, 07:33 PM
Wrightsons must be close to writing off an ill timed and ill considered move...

How on earth GEN has any cred is startling - why would the Herald today publish Watsons rantings as if they meant anything?

If ABN AMRO think they can raise 40m for Agrigenesis (a subset of what is only worth 18m at best) then they really are as dumb as we think they are

marinesalvor
17-03-2004, 07:34 PM
To answer you WW - no I dont believe there is anything inside GEN that is worth anything, even in a IP firesale

marinesalvor
17-03-2004, 07:36 PM
To answer you WW - no I dont believe there is anything inside GEN that is worth anything, even in a IP firesale

Sid
17-03-2004, 07:38 PM
quote:Originally posted by marinesalvor

Wrightsons must be close to writing off an ill timed and ill considered move...



I don't think WRI mark to market their GEN holding in their accounts.

willy_wonker
18-03-2004, 08:08 AM
quote:Originally posted by marinesalvor

If ABN AMRO think they can raise 40m for Agrigenesis (a subset of what is only worth 18m at best) then they really are as dumb as we think they are


Who on earth is gonna invest their money in Agrigenesis after the disgraceful GEN? Do you trust what the management have to say after all the smokes and mirrors are cleared?

donner
18-03-2004, 09:09 AM
Believe it or not I still see good value in GEN.

Recently the press has been rather negative. Bringing down the price. At the same time away from the press they have been busy with finding new "industry and trade" investors but for the ag side only.


If you ask me the medical side is a dead duck. It should be wound up and IP sold to a like company. Here they are talking about mergers and the like. Sounds more looking after ones interests rather than the share holders.

But there is a lot of value in the ag side with rising demand, commercial opps and increasing revenues.

The show isn't over yet.

willy_wonker
18-03-2004, 09:31 AM
Donner, how do one value GEN? I have been looking closely at GEN for sometime, but cannot get my head around how much it is worth.

donner
18-03-2004, 09:35 AM
Take a look at Arborgen and their recent slide presentation and ask yourself why would CAH and RBC be teaming up when at the same time RBC is saying they will buy in to GEN (in the annual report).

Also have a look at a couple of other GEN threads. Some good comments in them.

marinesalvor
18-03-2004, 11:53 AM
Donner - we will have to agree to disagree - the agri side of GEN is being split out - leaving what (even if capital raising is successful)

GEN missed the boat 3 years ago

coulda been shoulda been our flagship biotech company

donner
18-03-2004, 12:38 PM
Its being split out the same way FFS did their split. IE it will remain an entity of GEN.

THe two companies will have their own CEO's, accounts blah blah but still be under the one umbrella. Previously everything was consolidated.

THats my understanding of it anyway.

This from the latest HY (Do you think Horizon2 will have a strategic interest?)

In December 2003 the Plant Division was transferred to a new wholly ownedsubsidiary, AgriGenesis Biosciences Limited. A capital raising process iscommencing shortly, in conjunction with ABN AMRO Craigs. AgriGenesis isseeking trade investors which have a strategic interest in its plantprogramme.

marinesalvor
18-03-2004, 01:09 PM
no hope asking 40m for what is worth a fraction of 18 - no products that justify this valuation

happy to be proved wrong over time!!!

donner
18-03-2004, 01:17 PM
and that is where youare mistaken MS. GEN have some very valuable assets carrying a value of zero in their books when if you marked them to market you would get a very different outcome.

Ngapuke
18-03-2004, 03:35 PM
I agree, Donner. I think there's a lot going on behind the scenes at the moment, and wouldn't be surprised if a full bid for Agrigenesis was made. With GEN itself disappearing by year end into some sort of merger with an overseas co. (as flagged by Watson 2 days ago, and in his investor presentation last month.)

It would be much more attractive for Rubicon or any other entity wanting to secure a piece of Agrigenesis IP to take the whole thing, not just a minority stake. And by depressing the GEN share price for a while, they're creating the perfect climate for such a proposal to receive GEN shareholder approval (required if more than 15% of Agrigenesis is sold).

Note that no date has yet been announced for the AGM ... yet here we are in mid March, two and a half months after financial year end.

Disck. Hold GEN, RBC

marinesalvor
18-03-2004, 03:51 PM
if what they have was valuable it would have been bought up - many USA cos are buying whole cos in Oz or canada for IP - they arent interested in GEN

willy_wonker
18-03-2004, 04:35 PM
Why would someone want a company that is constantly making a lost and requires further capital injection in the near future? It only takes 2 years for GEN to burn $23 million. Also, the management have been telling so many fibs in the market that no one believes them anymore.

marinesalvor
18-03-2004, 04:38 PM
old style corporate raiding is alive and well in biotech WW - get in with cash, buy IP - fire the expensive but paralytic staff and ship the IP to your own labs - hell of a lot cheaper than doing in house r&d

Beatnik
18-03-2004, 06:45 PM
quote:Originally posted by marinesalvor

old style corporate raiding is alive and well in biotech WW - get in with cash, buy IP - fire the expensive but paralytic staff and ship the IP to your own labs - hell of a lot cheaper than doing in house r&d



Dont you mean "Parasitic"

Ngapuke
18-03-2004, 06:56 PM
I'm not sure what planet you're on: if the staff are 'parasitic' or 'paralytic' (take your pick), where does the IP come from?

marinesalvor
19-03-2004, 07:53 AM
there is some IP there just that the management have been so slow to do anything about commercialising it - paralytic

still however - noone has been interested in rading GEN - its not really THAT valuable

willy_wonker
25-03-2004, 08:52 AM
I noticed that there was a crossing of over 400k of share done at around 75 cents last week. Who would buy such a large parcel in GEN? Someone in the know or someone just plan dont know?

donner
25-03-2004, 09:08 AM
and buying depth building.

First quarter of the new financial year and I fully expect to see this grab some attention.

Arborgen and IP has a value. Rather like making the comparison to TWR when you look at their business. Losing money hand over fist in Oz, capital needs etc etc but as one wag around here says the value is in the book of funds under management. How many decades does it take to build up a book like that, with its networks and market brand awareness? Similarly, with IP and knowledge databases even if the company is a commercial flop. Though in the next few years I think you will see the ag side move to being a commercial success.

marinesalvor
25-03-2004, 09:23 AM
completely disagree - theres a massive step from having a research project to having something that someone will pay for - go on - go and ask some hard questions - GEN have NO IDEA how to make money from their platform - just watch them disappear

willy_wonker
25-03-2004, 09:41 AM
MS, I am interested in what you think GEN is worth?

I am still finding it hard to get my head around to valuing GEN. I need to have a value before I invest.

marinesalvor
25-03-2004, 09:45 AM
dont invest - thats my advice

do some research on them - ie science threads, lead compounds - you will not be impressed

GEN should have been so much better

willy_wonker
25-03-2004, 01:10 PM
Thanks for the info MS. Just wonder why there are no board changes or restructuring to reduce expenditure? With nearly 10 million in revenue, there could be some margin there for at least a small profit.

marinesalvor
25-03-2004, 01:26 PM
already some restructures and cuts - a pity as there was good scientific talent there

and agrigenesis is an attempt at structural change

donner
25-03-2004, 02:06 PM
quote:Originally posted by marinesalvor

old style corporate raiding is alive and well in biotech WW - get in with cash, buy IP - fire the expensive but paralytic staff and ship the IP to your own labs - hell of a lot cheaper than doing in house r&d


I agree with you MS that the medical research side is a pup. In fact even a leech maybe now. I say this because your comments seem to indicate that that side is their subject. But what I have been concentrating on is the Agrigenesis business.

And your comments above are probably more on the money than even you have realized. Have you considered Horizon2 as perhaps the vehicle to do the raiding? Just what is RBC going to do with TEN's capital repayment? Why is GPG sitting on the board of RBC? Why is Wrightsons on the board of GEN? Could the medical business be sold ( or merged with another entity as suggested last week by GEN) as way to offset any entry in to GEN? What commercial opportunites and revenues does Arborgen actually have?

Are these the type of questions you mean MS? I have addressed these and others and have come up with a totally different conclusion from you.

I guess the real value will be the price H2 or whoever it is that ABNis stitching a deal with pays for entry. Though I suspect that will be at a discount rather than a premium.

marinesalvor
25-03-2004, 03:16 PM
Hi Donner - I think you ascribe motives, intent and strategic thinking to companies that are nowhere near them in practicality

What products (be specific) do Agrigenesis have that are within 3 years of earning their keep in the market - dont just say "Arborgen" cos you know that wont as well as I do

we both agree that any price ABN's get will be a profit for them but a massive discount for GEN shareholders

willy_wonker
25-03-2004, 03:21 PM
Is Agrigensis current making a profit? If not, then who would invest their money after the disaster of GEN? I have a feeling that Agrigensis IPO would not go off well.

I still dont know how to value GEN. They dont have any IPs of any value. I assume one can only value it based on DCF which is in the negative.

MeNoBatty
25-03-2004, 04:44 PM
quote:Originally posted by willy_wonker

Is Agrigensis current making a profit? If not, then who would invest their money after the disaster of GEN? I have a feeling that Agrigensis IPO would not go off well.

I still dont know how to value GEN. They dont have any IPs of any value. I assume one can only value it based on DCF which is in the negative.


IMHO, NZ will not see another serious Biotech raising unless there is a freaken miracle. Market too small and not able to absorb speculative IPO's like this. Still cant believe GEN got it away the first time. Any NZ Biotech worth its salt will have to go to Aussie to raise serious cashola from public. ASX has history of speculative mining stocks with highly subjective forecasting to base DCF on. Witness the current rash of IPOs going on accross the ditch. GEN need to focus attention on Aussie partnership.

Only an industry insider would know if there was any value in AgriGen. Wrightsons should show some direction. NZ has great research but no people here capable of taking it to consumers.

donner
25-03-2004, 05:27 PM
quote:Originally posted by marinesalvor

Hi Donner - I think you ascribe motives, intent and strategic thinking to companies that are nowhere near them in practicality

What products (be specific) do Agrigenesis have that are within 3 years of earning their keep in the market - dont just say "Arborgen" cos you know that wont as well as I do

we both agree that any price ABN's get will be a profit for them but a massive discount for GEN shareholders


Perhaps I do but if you get it right more times than you get it wrong, then you are ahead. No?

For products can I refer you to slides 30,31 and 32 in the last press release. In that same presentation note slides 25 and 28 where the replacement value of their assets is $50m (25) and how close they are to commercializaton of products (28).

Put that $50m together with some figures of valuation for Arborgen, of which GEN owns 5%, from RBC's reports, do some maths and you will see a different picture emerge in terms of value.

zyreon
25-03-2004, 08:53 PM
*considers allocating some risk capital for a forray into this issue*

Hopefully the green party (eco-terrorist technophobic neuronally deficient hippies) will not bother this fine institution.

marinesalvor
26-03-2004, 08:51 AM
donner - one thing I have learnt in the biotech game... never ever believe what is released by the company - of course they think cool things about themselves
where we make money here, aus and usa is adding the appropriate discount factor to burblings from people like Jimmy watson - I have, plus my analysis based on products and markets makes me certain GEN is a loser

you still havent told me what products can turn in a surplus within a couple of years?? - ok - have a go at a 5 year timeframe...

donner
26-03-2004, 09:50 AM
I have if you care to look at the slides. A tip is ...available in 2004. Whether or not it is a success and sells well, who knows. But thats like anything I guess.

For a moment, lets assume you are right. The company will never amount to anything. In that case what will happen? Have you considered break up value?

biker
26-03-2004, 10:30 AM
Jim Watson seems to get an amazing amount of press and TV coverage.I've seen his face many times I feel I know him.Genesis certainly hasn't suffered due to a lack of media exposure.

marinesalvor
26-03-2004, 10:32 AM
sadly biker - for ppl wnating to talk up GIF policies and knowledge economy hes the only game in town - others like Cooper, Shepherd, Gluckman and Denny are too busy amking opportunities to burble on....

donner
26-03-2004, 06:59 PM
Agree with you about Watson. You know the guy gets paid near on $300k for wealth destruction.

Has anyone else cast an eye over this one?

marinesalvor
29-03-2004, 07:55 AM
yes - understood he was on that much - what a waste - hes no CEO - but a good lab manager - he should have stayed there

donner
29-03-2004, 08:06 AM
Actually I stand corrected its more like $370k. Plus all the others that earn well in excess of $100k and $200k. There are quite a few.

It indicates to me there is plenty of room to cut costs.

Right now there is approximately $23m in the bank. Revenues are expected to meet costs this year. So with interest the $23m should grow.

There are just over 26m shares on issue.

That equates to just under one dollar of cash for each share if you take the most simple view.

Then what value for the rest of the business?

Sorry you think otherwise MS but this is a very cheap buy right now.

Still no announcement on the AGM. I think there must be some big issues at stake. Most of them emanating from Wrightsons. I hope so. Watson and his cronies need a rocket up them and this might be it.

marinesalvor
29-03-2004, 10:15 AM
again - please tell me what products they have - and how they could possibly show a surplus (I wont even press you on "profit") withing the next 5 years....

marinesalvor
29-03-2004, 10:18 AM
until you can answer above questions there is no way revenues can match costs - that is completely laughable!!! noone would seriously believe a statement like that

donner
29-03-2004, 02:45 PM
MS I have told you where to find the information that will answer your questions. It is not for me to ladle those who expect to be spoon fed.

marinesalvor
29-03-2004, 02:46 PM
Donner - I know more about their science than you will ever know - and it still dont add up

donner
29-03-2004, 03:00 PM
You know MS. I picked up on the fact that you know well about what they do quite early on in the piece. In fact I wouldn't be at all surprised if you were one of the clever scientists that work there or have worked there.

But add up 5% of Arborgen @$250m, with an optional 5% next year. $55m worth of plant and assets. $23m worth of cash in the bank. $10-15m worth of revenues (from EOY report). New product coming to market soon. All of this just on the Agrigenesis side. Divide by 26m shares and see what you get.

Bugger the science, psoriasis research and everything else. It matters not.

marinesalvor
29-03-2004, 03:04 PM
it does matter - big time - without product and commercialisation path biotechs are dead ducks... that 55m assets is grossly inflated, as is revenues - where are they coming from? FORST? yeah right "new product coming to market soon" complete BS

donner
30-03-2004, 09:10 AM
It occurred to me that with WRI holding GEN and GEN trying to spin off Agrigen it would leave WRI with no input into Agrigen and only deriving benefit from Agrigen via their GEN holding.

Clearly that is not what they want.

With the ructions at the last AGM of WRI trying to get board seats I would say there is a lot at stake here at this next AGM. I will hazzarda guess that this is probably why there has been no AGM set yet. The different camps are probably trying to shore up support for or against the resolutions.

All of the value is in the Agrigen side. Especially for WRI the animal friendly grasses. So why would they want to be squeezed out of Agrigen and left holding the baby in GEN and its failed medical sciences.

Should be fun times ahead.

I myself will be voting with WRI. And if they have any re-elections on existing board seats and members I shall be voting against the encumbents.

willy_wonker
30-03-2004, 12:41 PM
Down another 4.5% today. This is looking ugly. Blood on the streets. Willy thinks he should stay out of this company.

marinesalvor
30-03-2004, 12:43 PM
plenty of better deals out there in the biotech space WW

willy_wonker
30-03-2004, 03:11 PM
MS, what's a good biotech company to watch out for? I am struggling to find one in the NZ market.

MeNoBatty
30-03-2004, 04:12 PM
quote:Originally posted by willy_wonker

MS, what's a good biotech company to watch out for? I am struggling to find one in the NZ market.


That's a really good question. From where i sit, i can see no listed biotech worth investing in. All the good ones are private and not available to average Joe Punter. :(

willy_wonker
30-03-2004, 04:41 PM
MNB, the sad thing is that after GEN's disaster and other bio tech listing, the NZ public is skeptical. It will make it hard for the other Bio Tech firms in NZ to raise funds in the future.

Very Sad.

marinesalvor
31-03-2004, 06:04 AM
as I have said in the past - listings here are dead the moment they list... look to Australia.. or the USA, or if you can raise enough - try doing angel work here - get close to the industry and for heavens sake forget GEN and BLT as being representative of the industry!

marinesalvor
31-03-2004, 11:27 AM
Genesis Research and Development Corporation (NZX/ASX:GEN) today announced
that a Phase II trial of its childhood eczema therapeutic candidate,
AVAC(TM), has reached the 50 percent enrolment milestone.

anyone impressed with this glib little line?

willy_wonker
31-03-2004, 12:15 PM
It seems that the market dont give a rats bottom anymore.

marinesalvor
31-03-2004, 02:51 PM
and so they shouldnt - that announcement means diddly squat

donner
31-03-2004, 05:01 PM
Nope. It is a redherring. The crux of the main issue at hand is why no AGM ann?

madmike
01-04-2004, 04:56 PM
quote:Originally posted by donner

Nope. It is a redherring. The crux of the main issue at hand is why no AGM ann?


agree , last agm was announced 7/2/03 with full year result. nearly 2 mths on from this years full year result and no date for agm.
i find if companies delay fundamentals like agm/profit results/ etc theres only one type of news shareholders can expect and thats badddddddddddd.
wouldn't be surprised if they ask shareholders for money (eg rights issue) as well as announcing they have received cash from spin off of the forestry part (sweetner for shareholders)

Ngapuke
02-04-2004, 03:02 PM
quote:Originally posted by donner

Nope. It is a redherring. The crux of the main issue at hand is why no AGM ann?


What are the requirements of the Co's Act, and NZX listing, as far when an AGM has to be held?

It's now April, and still not even a date announced. Surely it's about time shareholders who are not seated around the GEN board table had an opportunity to question management, and ask what the hell is going on?

tim23
02-04-2004, 04:57 PM
Does anyone think Wrightson might make a takeover bid for the company?

donner
02-04-2004, 09:44 PM
Don't know Tim but this is one to watch. Whatever does happen I think there is a lot more downside to be had first.

zyreon
03-04-2004, 08:31 AM
under the companies act (s120(b)(ii)) for non exempt companies AGM must be held not later than 6 months after the balance date and ss(c) states not later than 15 months after the previous agm.

Though it may be different for listed companies... (trying to find appropriate NZX regulation)...

OK could not find NZX regulation but in the first schedule of the companies act the company must give notice to shareholders etc no less than 10 working days before the meeting

interesting...

willy_wonker
05-04-2004, 01:00 PM
Bel, you are a braver man than me. I have been looking at this puppy since the day it listed and are still too nervous to buy at these levels. Maybe one day I will buy, but at the moment I want to sleep at nights.

I still cant value this puppy. Can anyone give me an analysis and its value?

marinesalvor
05-04-2004, 01:08 PM
still cant agree with you Belg - but best of luck to you

I value GEN at well less than 30c and that would only be if they had have progressed anything closer to market this year

airedale
05-04-2004, 04:23 PM
Hi Belgarion, "pyramid action", may be, also known as averaging down. And the danger is that you will use up your cash before Gen gets to the bottom of the slope.
One of my tutors always says "why stay in a stock which is going down". There are plenty of others going up.
When it does really turn upwards there will be confirmation on the weekly charts.
Until then I wish you luck, hope that you make a bundle

neopole
05-04-2004, 05:14 PM
hi belg.
i use the term "doubling down" in reference to your term "pyramid action". it is a gambling term. if done correctly it is very rewarding. i am doing this with BLT.
averaging down is a less risker venture, as you are only trying to break even.
i am also developing my system ...that is afordable to me and lets me sleep at night.
my next target was going to be WRI but it seems to be making a nice recovery.
am glad to see that other more experienced folk are doing or thinking about "doubling down"
and yes "shape and size" is worth keeping quiet,

clearasmud
05-04-2004, 05:29 PM
This stock i'm hoping is near the bottem.Restructuring process will have to begin soon.Good high risk/high return investment!

marinesalvor
05-04-2004, 06:44 PM
the difference between you and GEN management though Belg - is that you know your stuff with money - I have seen nothing to suggest GEN people do!

willy_wonker
06-04-2004, 08:08 AM
MS, how did you get a valuation of 30 cents? Just interested in your numbers. Thanks.

I am still struggling to find a good bio tech firm in NZ to invest on the market.

Ngapuke
07-04-2004, 12:14 PM
quote:Originally posted by clearasmud

This stock i'm hoping is near the bottem.Restructuring process will have to begin soon.Good high risk/high return investment!

Come back, Fairy Godfather ... I was enjoying taking advantage of all those lovely sell orders in multiples of 5,000 or 10,000 ( designed to push the price down while negotiations are underway re Agrigenesis ?) Please give us some more of the $475k shares you bought at $0.75c for this purpose in early March. BTW - did you offer the seller of that $475k parcel a side deal?

Ngapuke
22-04-2004, 04:08 PM
quote:Originally posted by belgarion

airedale ... big risks = big gains (or big losses) ... once everyone knows what the situation is and the stock is tacking upwards, the gains are less than 100% over the short-term (less than 3 months).

I keep a bit of dosh aside (or quickly available) to play high risk stocks when I feel that the market 'just isn't getting it'. Last was TRH with near on 150% gain and before that BCA with less success (should have held longer). Before that my last big play was AIR and a similar (from memory) gain. The shape of my pyrimid is different for GEN (Both TRH, BCA and AIR were similar). I haven't been caught out yet in either NZ or the UK. I will eventually though.

One has to ask ... where are the big sales of GEN? Do the big holders know more about value than the bods selling at present? Methinks so.

At the very least, Im with Donner on the NTA value calc. This year is a good one for cash raising and if there's going to be a restructure, Im betting it will be this year and soon. That's what I would do.


"That's what I would do..."
So did you, Belgarion?

clearasmud
22-04-2004, 05:30 PM
Bought 15,000 on 5/4 at 57c:D

willy_wonker
23-04-2004, 08:33 AM
DJ NZ PRESS: Wrightson May Sell 15.4% Stake In Genesis<GEN.NZ><WRI.NZ>

WELLINGTON (Dow Jones)--Rural services company Wrightson Ltd. (WRI.NZ) will likely sell its 15.4% stake in biotechnology company Genesis Research & Development Corp.(GEN.NZ) if Rural Portfolio's partial takeover bid for Wrightson is successful, the National Business Review reported Friday.
Analysts said the sale of the stake is likely after Craig Norgate's Rural Portfolio outlined in an investment statement plans for a strategic review of Wrightson, the reportsaid.
Genesis "is not a key value driver for Wrightson," said an unnamed analyst quoted by the National Business Review

Lawso
23-04-2004, 09:17 AM
So why the 4c jump in GEN on Wednesday and 9c yesterday. +18% in two days. Wot's going on?

willy_wonker
23-04-2004, 09:19 AM
My guess is that institution (AXA) stop selling for now, thus dead cat bounce. Only a guess !

donner
19-05-2004, 07:41 PM
Anyone read the latest Annual Report? Care to post your thoughts?

Am only one third of the way through it now. The medical part.

A quick skim revealed that if everything is going to go to plan then WRI will be shafted big time.

It looks like a real appeasement to investor Dilberry. Gleaning over the issues for Mums and Dads but leaving out the detail on the main ones.

Opinions and comments welcome.



Just thinking about it...I intend to vote with whatever WRI put up to the AGM.Reasons are many which I won't go in to here. Though my votes don't count for much I am sure there are enough voters reading this board that may be influenced by any action WRI might care to take to propagate their message to holders.

So if a WRI representative is reading, please, consider taking a cue from BWR and co at NOG in shareholder communications.

Ngapuke
19-05-2004, 09:55 PM
quote:Originally posted by donner

... a cue from BWR and co at NOG in shareholder communications.

Can you explain plse Donner? I doubt if I'll be able to make it to the AGM, but am keen to know ahead of time what the motions might be so I can give my proxies to someone/entity who has same views as me.

donner
20-05-2004, 04:29 PM
BWR is a staffer of NOG who contributes regularly to relevant issues and questions posed in regards to NOG.

I believe it would be good if someone from WRI could put their side of the argument forward to help people to understand the issues facing GEN/WRI.

Ngapuke
22-05-2004, 09:23 AM
Possibly irrelevent to Genesis, but it seems that their UK partner in evaluating AVAC is likely to be taken over by with another co. :-

Bid news lifted SR Pharma, up 1 1/2p at 26p after the cash-strapped asthma drug developer told its AGM it was in M&A discussions. SR also announced the departure of chairman Eric Boyle, and gave some upbeat test data.

See AGM statement in http://www.srpharma.com/news.htm for more details.

donner
08-06-2004, 06:31 PM
GEN's AGM today. I went along out of curiosity. A couple things worth noting came from it.

First and most important was that Watson is to go. He says he will return to science to conduct cancer research as soon as a replacement is found. Search for the replacement is to begin soon.

Secondly, was the Cartesian product was released today in the US. Though going forward revenues are to "modest" according to the director in charge which in actual fact means paltry at best. So there you go. GEN's first product to market. Hoorah.

The AGM was full of big promises, platitudes and retrospective self congratulatory backslapping. There was a consistent message of the market doesn't understand us thats why you've lost all your money, types of argument. Load of bollocks I say. They just haven't got the products and to keep saying be patient,its only another ten years to go before you get your pay dirt tells me they think the shareholders are nothing but their fools.

Three directors were up for renewal. A poll was to be taken. I don't know what that means exactly but the vote seemed to be restricted to the audience only. I voted against all of them.

Seems to me that WRI are in there doing the business. Clearing a path to the trough so some others may get a fair share. Long may it last too.

Looking to raise about $10-15m for agri-genesis without selling control. So even at 49.9% that makes it at least a $20m company. But alas, no buyers so far makes it worth what it is today.

The medical side looks extinct to me. The next great hope is AVAC. I hope they sell it all off and just put the money into the agricultural side. There is still $23m cash in GEN, if they get something for the medical and inject cash into the agricultural side the value should be about double what it is now.

But I am sure there will be another buying opportunity before it gets better. Looks to me like the bloodletting is being managed so as not appear as a disaster.

marinesalvor
09-06-2004, 06:00 AM
a good summary donner - absolutley agree

Lawso
09-06-2004, 11:18 AM
Wow, talk about bitter & twisted, donner!

I too was at yesterday's meeting and came away with an entirely different impression.

You talk about "big promises, platitudes and retrospective self-congratulatory back-slapping . . . load of bollocks" etc.

I happen to believe that David Irving and Jim Watson are honest men. I believe them when they say that, in 2005 -

[list] revenues will increase
expenditure will fall
the deficit will be lower
the bank balance will be healthy

GEN has two products now in Stage II trials, a stronger position than when it had only PVAC. (I make no comment about AgriGenesis because I don't fully understand it.)

How come you're so much in love with the WRI faction, donner? Having prematurely regretted their buy-in, they are only out to make trouble, I believe, to defend their position and fight off the attack on their other flank (Norgate). Why else would Palmer have made that outrageous public criticism recently of the company of which he's a director? A clear breach of fiduciary duty to GEN shareholders, IMO. He's entitled to his opinion but as a director he should confine such remarks to the boardroom. And why else call for a poll yesterday and try (unsuccessfully) to block the re-election of two long-serving and highly competent directors?

Anyway, the s p is up over 10% this morning. :) So the market doesn't share donner's warped view.

maxine
09-06-2004, 11:33 AM
I was there too. I do not know enough facts to authoratively rule between Donner and Lawso's points of view, but for those interested in the exchange of "impressions" from the ASM my persepctive of the company and the meeting generally resonates much more with that articulated by Donner than by Lawso.

Lawso
09-06-2004, 01:32 PM
O ye of little faith . . .

Shares now up 8c - 12% :)

Lawso
09-06-2004, 04:10 PM
Now up 13 to 80 = +19.4% :D

marinesalvor
09-06-2004, 04:26 PM
hope you were able to get out!!

willy_wonker
09-06-2004, 04:33 PM
I have been looking into GEN since it listed.

Willy will not participate in the buying of GEN. Dont trust and dont like current management. Hope the entire board gets kicked and the assets and cash return to shareholders.

Capitalist
09-06-2004, 05:08 PM
Well done Lawso my good man ;). Not bad for a day's work.

Reality the final arbiter, as always :D:D:D

Lawso
09-06-2004, 06:33 PM
Thanks, Cap. I always thought of you as a person of impeccable taste and judgement.

Those other guys think I'm only in GEN for the money. But there's something far more important than that. I have to improve my bottom-scraping position on SEC's stock picks list.

maxine
09-06-2004, 07:16 PM
Lawso and Capitalist, note the volumes: bit soon to book an unrealised 19.4% on the basis of two trades totalling $3,200...unless you only hold a few hundred shares. In which case your gains might cover a round of drinks. I too am intrigued by the lift in price, but I really need to see it with some weight behind it. I see that there a 2T at the 77 bid but 7 or 8 times that on the offer with a 3 cent spread....suggests it is not climbing any higher, and will tumble if anyone seriously wants to get out. All rather grim and sad really... although Lawso if you picked this one and can bank meaningful gains good on you - well done.

donner
10-06-2004, 08:27 AM
Lawso,
No one is denigrating anyones integrity or reputation, but let the facts speak for themselves. Also, you are welcome to believe what anyone tells if you so wish. And it is not my position to second guess why someone says something.

The reason why I support the WRI faction is because I believe the medical side is defunct and destined to be a failure. Article earlier this year quoted Watson as saying something along the lines of, GEN not having the clout that matters to make the real breakthroughs needed and that they really need to merge with someone else. Therefore, that makes the Agri side part that matters. It is also the part that WRI is interested in.

Maxine,
Thank you for your comments. If I remember correctly you are quite savvy with corporate rules and regs. Do you know what the significance was of that poll? It obviously had Watson rattled. I wanted to jump up and ask if this was the opportunity to reduce the board to 6 or 7 like Irving had suggested.

maxine
10-06-2004, 10:36 AM
Donner, being the Corporate train spotter I am I actually just tried to look it up but couldn't find the details where I expected to..so I will go from memory instead.

Votes at an ASM can be taken on a show of hands, but of course for a company like GEN, and indeed most listed Companies the thing is a bit absurd. People put up their hands and there is no way of knowing if they are even shareholders as opposed to someone's granny, and if they are shareholders, maybe they only hold 100 shares, just so they can feel important and turn up for the scones and tea.

Nonetheless, if a company manifestly has the proxies in the bag to carry a motion it is an expedient way of conducting the theatre that is an NZ PLC's ASM.

However any shareholder (or perhaps any five shareholders, and/or any one or more blocks of shares representing 5% of the company or some such...this was the bit I wanted to look up), can request a ballot...meaning the votes actually get ballotted properly: counted, and no-one has the embarrassment of being seen to vote a certain way.

In the past I have seen this requested from the floor at the time of the request for the show of hands, or demanded or indicated as appropriate based on the debate around an issue, or maybe indicated because the forest of hands looks much the same for and against (odd - given the forest typically accounts for only a small portion of retail moms and pops, and they often all agree, but a big institutional or corporate holder has a different view (but only one right arm!)).

Typically therefore if a matter is uncontentious, it is ruled on a show of hands, but if it is controversial, or likely to be defeated, it goes to a ballot (Irving mistakenly called it a proxy at first, which must have confused people, and then latter called it a poll, when really I think he meant to say ballot).

What was unusual at GEN was that someone (and you would guess a major shareholder like WRI or perhaps Emerald Capital or whoeever else they have on their register - not too sure)had asked, on the side as it were, for a ballot. This can safely be assumed to mean that they were voting against, and that they expected to at least have a chance of prevailing in the vote....indeed you might even assume that they expected to win, because if they thought it would be a fight and they were serious you might have expected them to have made public statements urging shareholders not to support the candidates, or to have put up alternative candidates in a fight for the spots.

This means that the outcome is a bit curious: we can't know the facts I guess, but one scenario is that someone (and the first guess would be WRI), expected as a fairly routine matter, to defeat the two candidates. They failed...which really seems like a misjudgement was made by someone, or some cunning behind the scenes drumming up of support went on....but all of this is conjecture.

I note today James McLean has been appointed Chairman, so we have a guy who has gone from maybe not being appointed at all (and based on my conjecture above, not supported by WRI) yesterday, to a guy who is Chairman of a company with no CEO (sort of...remember Watson never said he would step down from the Board when he steps down from CEO).

If you look into the minutae of all this some other observations might be made: what I think seems to be common practice, is that if a few matters are to be put to a ballot then all matters are (not necessarily the case, and it does invovle a lot of counting and fluffing about, but most of that is not marginal to processing a ballot on only one or two motions). In this case this didn't happen, and it really seened like Irving was surprised to see that a ballot was requested. My guess is that the requesting party had expected their to be a ballot on all matters, and was a bit taken aback when Irving started cavalierly running through each matter with a simple (and manifestly shonky if one assumes any contest, but perfectly expedient if one doesn't) show of hands.

As a further bit-chy aside I notice that

Lawso
10-06-2004, 02:10 PM
Maxine, donner et al:

Of course it was Palmer of WRI who called for a poll. And of course Irving and Watson were a bit rattled, because the least they might have expected from a fellow-director was prior notice of his intention.

Note that Palmer was holding over 4 million undirected proxies. My understanding was that a poll was requested only in respect of the re-election of McLean and Williams, not the other US director, Gillis. Curious.

I haven't seen the voting figures but it's safe to assume that Palmer directed his proxies (unsuccessfully) against the re-election of McLean and Williams. I think that as a director he had a duty to make his intentions clear and explain his reasons, instead of hiding behind a secret ballot.

Maxine, you're stretching the long bow to say that yesterday's nearly 20% jump in the share price resulted from JW's intention to step down. It might equally (and more logically IMO) have been a response to the chairman's positive comments, as summarised in my post yesterday - higher revenues, lower costs, healthy bank balance etc etc. - and perhaps a favourable impression made by the new AgriGenesis guy. In fact, a combination of factors arising from what I still regard as a positive meeting.
BTW there were 11,680 shares traded, according to the Herald, not Maxine's $3200 worth. Not a lot, but no mad rush of sellers!

Re J McLean: An excellent successor to Irving. An unusual combination of B.Sc. and ACA. Former partner in Ernst & Young. In GEN since 1994 as executive, director and substantial shareholder.

As for donner's and maybe others' infatuation with the WRI faction, can you or anyone give a single example of a positive contribution they've made since going into GEN. No, their influence has been entirely negative IMO.

Lawso
10-06-2004, 02:30 PM
Up another 3c to 83! 35,300 traded so far today.

maxine
10-06-2004, 03:03 PM
lawso, yesterday it wss only 3,200 at the 80 cents you had used to get your 19+% gain. The rest of the volume reported in the NZH was around 73 cents or so.

Today I see only around 25,000 volume, not 35,300: what is your data source?

Re me drawing a long bow...you are correct. It was supposed to be a playful/ bit-chy/ humourous length bow. Hope other readers got a smile out of it.

Lawso
10-06-2004, 04:00 PM
Teletext. Currently 37,700 shares, but back 1c to 82.

*****y? - kinda. Humorous [?]

maxine
10-06-2004, 04:53 PM
I think Teletext is wrong. Anyone else care to solve the mystery for Lawso and me?

donner
11-06-2004, 03:39 PM
Looks like the party's over already.

Anyone got any excuses for it this time?

BigBob
11-06-2004, 03:41 PM
Considering the volume, both up and down, you can hardly call it a party...

marinesalvor
23-06-2004, 11:25 AM
and down she goes.... hope people were able to get out

Ngapuke
23-06-2004, 12:16 PM
Perhaps partly driven by scary headlines in publications like NBR about Wrightson dumping Genesis investment if RPI win? Although comments by Norgate himself on Sharechat website would suggest this won't necessarily be the case. Could even indicate a 50.1% takeover bid for Genesis ;)

It’s hard to understand why they went in in the way they did when they did. It’s hard to see how they can justify having the chairman and chief executive on the board of a business that’s so small. That’s a heck of a commitment in terms of time compared to what you might get by putting that time into the rest of the Wrightson business. But you have to be committed to technology. Wrightson is a natural user of what comes out of biotechnology, particularly at the seeds end of the business. Perhaps they went about it in the wrong way.


http://www.sharechat.co.nz/features/iinterviews/article.php/4b1cd219

marinesalvor
23-06-2004, 12:28 PM
Norgate is only voicing what many people asked re WRIs ill considered move...

donner
29-06-2004, 04:09 PM
Interesting development today.

The next move will be more interesting. DO they replace or not? And with another WRI guy or not?

Opens up the door to negative speculation of WRI bailing out of their stake sending the price in to a spin.

Although Norgates comments above indicate that the move on GEN was not wrong just the execution.

Benlamnz
04-07-2004, 02:30 PM
Nice read for holders...
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,2961469a1865,00.html


Disc: on the sideline as this one seems one barge pole too far.

marinesalvor
04-07-2004, 07:07 PM
OMG - Rod O just maintains his title of "state the obvious" king - what on earth was the point of the article - is he a holder??

donner
18-07-2004, 07:31 PM
This may throw out a few skeletons and up the ante.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,2975389a11,00.html

Ngapuke
03-09-2004, 10:48 AM
For followers of obscure stocks sinking into oblivion, such as GEN.... UK partner SR Pharma seems to be in similar dire straights. Transferring from London Stock Echange listing to AIM secondary board while it is "seeking to conclude one or more corporate transactions". I wonder if this suggests that results from clinical trials of SR299 (to the extent they are known to the Co.), and from which GEN in theory benefits 50%, aren't looking too flash hot?

----------------------------------------------------
SR PHARMA PLC

UNAUDITED INTERIM RESULTS FOR THE 6 MONTHS ENDED 30 JUNE 2004

SR Pharma plc, the London based biopharmaceutical company, today announces its
unaudited interim results for the six months ended 30 June 2004.

CHAIRMAN'S STATEMENT

Dear Shareholder,

During the first half of 2004 there were a number of changes to the Board of SR
Pharma plc and I was delighted to accept the appointment as Chairman on 21 June
2004. I believe that the composition of your Board is now appropriate for the
current status of the Company and over the last few weeks, in liaison with the
directors, I have had in-depth discussions with our founding scientists, third
party collaborators, company advisers and industry observers.

As a result it is clear that the Board of SR Pharma plc needs to provide strong
and consistent leadership in an increasingly tough operating environment and as
a consequence we have implemented a number of actions to inject a sense of
urgency, and effect the change in culture required to ensure the survival and
ultimate development of the Company's core technology portfolio.

Immediate short-term initiatives include moving the Company's LSE listing from
the Main Market to the Alternative Investment Market by 30 September 2004;
further reducing the ongoing cost base, and seeking to conclude one or more
corporate transactions over the next 12 months in order to transform your
Company and thereby create a sustainable increase in shareholder value.

AIM Listing

Your Board has concluded that in order for the Company to seriously consider
and thereby conclude the type of potential corporate transactions currently
being contemplated with third parties, it needs to ensure a public listing
which better reflects the status of the Company. To this end the move to an AIM
listing will allow the Company greater flexibility in the type and nature of
transaction it can consider and will also serve to reduce ongoing corporate
costs. The transfer is expected to take effect on 30 September 2004, until when
the shares will continue to trade on the Official List. The Company has
appointed Grant Thornton Corporate Finance as its Nominated Adviser and
Hoodless Brennan & Partners plc as its Nominated Broker.

Financials

Our financial results for the half year reflect that of a company undergoing
change. The loss for the six months ended 30 June 2004 was £1.8m (2003: £
1.35m). During the period exceptional costs of £375,000 have been incurred in
Corporate and Administration as a result of one-off contractual payments being
made to former directors and redundancy payments being made to former staff.
Re-structuring undertaken during the period is forecast to result in annual
cost savings of approximately £450,000 per annum. Cash and short term deposits
amounted to £3.9m as of 30 June 2004 compared to £5.1m as at 31 December 2003.

Clinical Data

In May 2004 the Company announced the results from the Group's exploratory
allergic asthma study with SRP 299 which showed that in the primary efficacy
data there was a trend towards significance and when the data was adjusted for
variations between the treatment groups at baseline, there was significant
improvement in asthma symptoms in the patients who received two high dose
injections of SRP 299 when compared to placebo.

Results from the Group's 160 patient, phase II, placebo controlled trial with
SRP 299 for the treatment of Atopic Dermatitis is expected to report by the
year-end and a further study in atopic dermatitis bei

marinesalvor
10-09-2004, 12:29 PM
whats with the news today

what on earth is agrigenesis doing??? who is next?

donner
24-09-2004, 11:57 AM
The sacking/retirement or whatever of Peter Lee is confusing. He has only just got there with great acclaims when he did. He left a good job as well to take it up. I don't know what to make of it.

Its interesting though that when I read RBC's report they stated their intention to realize the value of Arborgen in their share price. They reckon it can add another twenty cents to it. I'm not sure how they get that but the Arborgen value is interesting because GEN owns five percent of it and carries the value at zero in their books.

Arborgen is a $60m (not sure if that is US or NZ) Rand D company with ties to some major US corps. 60m is got by way of the capitalization required from participants by 2006. But when reading RBC's report they say they will try to commercialize their IP. Which means revenues will be created which then creates a business.

What is particularly attractive about this is that the potential market is huge and if I were to make a guess and say, in light of the fact that some of the guys at RBC are the same guys who got Capstone listed on the NASDAQ, that sooner or later Arborgen will be listed on the NASDAQ as well at a PE of 10-20 then the five percent GEN holds is worth an awful lot more than nothing.

The catch is the call that exists on GEN's holding. They may be asked to stump up a lot of cash which they may or may not have.

So we may see a cash squeeze on them at some stage which could give rise to a cap raising or something similar. Alternatively they could sell and become cash rich.

WHatever they do, this is still undervalued and is one to watch. Timing will be critical on this one and it may not be appropriate for another year or two.

Still I'm holding on to my few thousand collected in the seventies.

marinesalvor
27-09-2004, 07:30 AM
Donner - wish I could share your optimism - see other threads for how crappy forestry really is - and here is arborgen trying to get rich supplying to a crappy industry

cant see Arborgen ever being listed - most agribios are moved in trade sales to a limited market

morv
27-09-2004, 11:46 AM
the man left because so many of the aggen workforce had left that there was nothing for him to do,and he nadnt achieved any new funding.re;arbo, its not meant to bring in cash till 2010plus a dose of internal friction.

marinesalvor
27-09-2004, 11:54 AM
Morv - it seems to me from reading the releases that ArG had narrowed to its best few projects - and that a few weeks before P lee went they were singing his praises on helping them focus!

tsb
27-09-2004, 04:23 PM
year well I/m happy to take a punt @ $0.56 - would be very geatfull if you would all lay off until my order is filled

saintjohn
27-09-2004, 06:37 PM
Agree with you tsb,
I'm sitting on a sockfull @.74
All the above negative press is not helping my cause.
Could we have silence please too at least a $1.00

Thanks all.

morv
27-09-2004, 08:02 PM
if the negative comments are to be silenced,i suggest u locate some of the departed staff members for some acidic comments on misdirection,and continued high expenditure at the top levels. but not all doom soon be a penny dreadful takeover target

saintjohn
27-09-2004, 08:18 PM
Agree 100%,
Just,.... keep it under your hat.
Bring on the takeover

marinesalvor
28-09-2004, 07:24 AM
nothing to takeover actually... more likely Agrigenesis will go in a trade sale at a discount and GEN will be wound up

marinesalvor
28-09-2004, 07:28 AM
good luck to those punting - I think there are better biotech punts out there - especially over the tasman

saintjohn
28-09-2004, 01:17 PM
Well marinesalvor,
I'm staying with this wreck because I think the value may be in the patents

Or to quote yourself.

"cos its there...somewhere...mabe..."

donner
28-09-2004, 02:20 PM
Patents of medical or agricultural?

Whats going on? Suddenly some liquidity has appeared. Is the beginning of a stake build?

tsb
28-09-2004, 04:30 PM
well thank you all very much - and I'm still looking for 4700 @ 56 - the depth is a real mess now

cdt18
28-09-2004, 06:19 PM
The moral of the story is that scientists make
S H I T capitalists

saintjohn
28-09-2004, 06:52 PM
On the button cdt18,

but a fortune can be made from the product you mention, if patent procedure is applied to the letter.

As Genesis has.

Lawso
28-09-2004, 07:20 PM
quote: The moral of the story is that scientists make
S H I T capitalists

Too simplistic, cdt18. Sure, Watson, the founder and CEO, has been a strong leader, but you're overlooking the fact that GEN has always had a strong board, with good business skills and experience to balance the scientific input. Just retired chairman David Irving is a former chairman of Watties and his successor Jim McLean, an executive director from 1994 to 2003, has both a science and a commerce degree and is a former partner in Ernst & Young. Longtime sharebroker/investment banker Jon Cimino has been a non-executive director since 1999.

marinesalvor
29-09-2004, 05:41 AM
saintjohn - patents are a 2 edged sword - a major cost liability plus a leg up to competitors - unrealised benefit from IP costs could sink GEN

marinesalvor
29-09-2004, 09:05 AM
do i take todays announcement that Peter Lee doesnt want his options???

saintjohn
29-09-2004, 10:48 AM
No choice:

Staff options cannot be transferred and entitlement is dependent on continued employment

Sauce: 2003 Annual Report

marinesalvor
29-09-2004, 10:51 AM
thanks

donner
04-10-2004, 04:57 PM
The increasingly deeper depth on the supply side may begin the long awaited crash. Although the volume on the buy side is increasing too. Just the prices aren't quite matching up yet.

Ngapuke
05-10-2004, 10:13 AM
quote:Originally posted by morv

.....re;arbo, its not meant to bring in cash till 2010plus a dose of internal friction.


morv - Can you elaborate on your comments about 'internal friction' re. Arborgen. Is this good or bad for GEN? Does it make their 5% shareholding more attractive to one of the 'Big 3' shareholders in Arborgen: Rubicon, Int'l Paper and Mead-Westvaco, for whom buying the GEN shares would raise their stake above the other two? (Clutching at straws here, I know, but hey.... someone's got to put GEN shareholders out of their misery...)

morv
05-10-2004, 11:45 AM
sorry ngapuke,somehow left the end of a sentence,the internal friction was alluding to the gen board which has been deeply divided since palmer & freeth tried to roll jw at their 1st meeting. basically since then their hasnt been a lot of leadership, just a lot of position protecting,lost oppurtunities,and failure to raise capital or finalise new oppurtunities. also a lot of laid off and departing staff, you make up your mind ,redirection or a brain and asset drain.

Ngapuke
05-10-2004, 12:25 PM
Thanks Morv.... sighhh.....roll on the takeover bid

donner
23-10-2004, 03:52 PM
Hres a succint summary of the state of GEN. Pretty much says it all and kind of agrees with me when I say IP is not being valued.

http://theindependent.co.nz/index1.html

Did you pick up your holding TSB?

marinesalvor
27-10-2004, 07:54 AM
Ngapuke - nothing to buy in a takeover

Bling_Bling
09-11-2004, 01:40 PM
Anyone know if WRI have sold their stake in GEN? Maybe WRI cant find a home for their large stake? GEN at 42 cents has the same market cap as BLT @ $11 million.

What is your views Marinesalvor?

madmike
09-11-2004, 06:53 PM
quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

Anyone know if WRI have sold their stake in GEN? Maybe WRI cant find a home for their large stake? GEN at 42 cents has the same market cap as BLT @ $11 million.

What is your views Marinesalvor?


how can the wri shareprice go up over the last 6 mths with the gen share slide!!!!...me thinks something isn't quite right here....some shareholders have the wrong gen...so to speak

donner
09-11-2004, 06:59 PM
Cut it any way you like. GEN is a buy in my book.

donner
23-11-2004, 11:30 AM
No made mention of their latest failure. I see also that their own trial is due to be concluded just before Christmas. Expect another dump of bad news on Christmas Eve like last year. That way they can sneak away from any bad press and accountability again.

Does anyone know what this latest roadshow of blue sky promises is about. What the message is?

GENERAL: GEN: Genesis Research Announces Results of Partner's Trial Genesis Research Announces Results of Partner's Phase II Trial in ChildhoodEczema - No Significant Efficacy Auckland, New Zealand, 22 November 2004 - Genesis Research and DevelopmentCorporation Ltd (NZSX/ASX:GEN) today announced that its UK partner, SRPharma, has assessed the results of its 166 patient trial of SRP299 inmoderate to severe atopic dermatitis in children and concluded that SRP299,in the dosage levels studied, has no efficacy of clinical significance inthis particular indication. SR Pharma has decided that it should not investfurther shareholder funds in taking the product forward in this indication.Genesis is conducting a separate Phase II trial of AVAC(TM), which itdeveloped in Auckland. The trial is fully enrolled and the last patient isdue to complete the trial in early December. An initial analysis of top lineresults is expected in late December and will be announced to shareholders when it is available.

Ngapuke
23-11-2004, 12:23 PM
"ADDRESS: GEN: Presentation to Shareholder
Copies can be requested from lcr@nzx.com "

It's a 7.5M Powerpoint, so make sure you have a high-speed connection ;)

I wasn't able to attend the presentations, and would be interested to hear from anyone who did. I get the impression that the SR Pharma announcement to the London Stock Exchange on Friday (night, our time) was a bit of a surprise for GEN, at least in terms of timing. Content can hardly have been surprising though, since SR Pharma signalled this news some months ago.

marinesalvor
24-11-2004, 07:50 AM
Donner - is GEN still a buy in your book???

donner
24-11-2004, 08:34 AM
A slow accumulate. In fact I have bought just recently.

What happens if the trial is successful? Or if someone wants to buy the Arborgen stake? Or if any one of many other possibilities come to pass.

Can you tell me how to value a Biotech objectively? I have searched high and low for some literature and cannot find any. I conclude even the experts don't know how. Basically they are valued according to its cash holdings. I think this a mistaken methodology and one day the nag just might come home.

marinesalvor
24-11-2004, 08:42 AM
have a read of "The Biotech Investor" by Tom Abate - really nice summary on what to look for and what not to touch

Personally it would have to drop much lower before I would put on the ACC list - better fish to fry over the tasman - eg ACR, BOS, EIF, NAR

Bling_Bling
24-11-2004, 09:03 AM
Donor, if you dont know how to value bio tech, then how do you know GEN is a buy at these prices? How did you put a value on GEN to make your decision that it is undervalue?

donner
24-11-2004, 10:21 AM
You'll have to troll through this and other threads for that info Blight. Its all there. Just got piece the pieces together.

It's in the accounts as well. Check out carrying values.

Read recent announcements also.

Then weigh up probabilities instead mathematical values.

marinesalvor
24-11-2004, 11:46 AM
ignore announcements - usually too late by then

also erroneous to look at what a company values its IP on its own books...

Bling_Bling
24-11-2004, 11:58 AM
Just had a looked at GEN results.

GEN currently has approx. $16m cash, but they are currently making a lost of $12m a year, so the cash will not last long. At 40 cents GEN maket cap is $12m. They probably run out of cash in one to two years, then what?

Disc: not a shareholder

marinesalvor
24-11-2004, 12:04 PM
thankfully there are still options out there - morst or forst funding, licensing in ip for faster pipeline, sale of arborgen etc, but they do need to pick right option...

Bling_Bling
24-11-2004, 12:16 PM
How much is Arborgen worth?
What IPs does Arborgen have that is of value?

donner
24-11-2004, 12:21 PM
Blight, read the RBC annual.

Ngapuke
27-11-2004, 09:41 AM
chagrin \shuh-GRIN\, noun:
Acute vexation, annoyance, or embarrassment, arising from disappointment or failure.
GEN shares suffer at bad news out of partner SR Pharma, whereas the latter dog shows sign of life.


quote:ENTREPRENEUR chairman Iain Ross is rumoured to have found a deal at biotech group SR Pharma which should set pulses racing. The shares jumped 3p to 38½p on rumours of an imminent reverse takeover which will be earnings enhancing from day one.http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/business/articles/timid85073?source=

http://www.susanhill.co.nz/Images/SPAvsGEN.gif

donner
27-11-2004, 09:52 AM
That chart is more likely a reflection of the mindset of the kiwi investor more than anything else.

Are you inferring the partner may be GEN?

Ngapuke
27-11-2004, 11:13 AM
The thought did cross my mind...partly depends on ones view as to the outcome of the AVAC trial, since SR Pharma stand to gain 50% of the benefit from a favourable outcome. Time will tell, I guess.

marinesalvor
29-11-2004, 06:56 AM
guys... as if buying GEN would "be earnings enhancing from day one"!!!

cdt18
29-11-2004, 08:49 PM
Get real Donner. GEN is a loser, GEN holders are losers. GEN is run by a mad scientist without a capitalist bone in his body. The only thing he knows how to do is run a good science lab with other peoples money. Follow Buffets advice, losers never turn around.

donner
30-11-2004, 07:49 AM
You are probably right cdt18. I suggest you don't buy any.

Bling_Bling
30-11-2004, 08:10 AM
GEN management has promised so much and delivered so little.

donner
30-11-2004, 10:00 AM
http://uk.biz.yahoo.com/041119/94/f6yff.html

Its a bit dated but gives more info on SR Pharma's merger talks which when taken with GEN's position isn't outside the realms of possible.

If you consider the costs saved in delisting, salary costs saved and any royalties they may be paying each other, then combine the two revenues with half the staff, add the monies in the banks together then you have a real starter for a merger.

Quite glad I have been topping up recently.

If they are to announce it I would say it would be with their trials another flop Christmas message.

This would then allow them to flog off the Ag side of the business to the likes of RBC leaving WRI well and truly with a cooked goose.

marinesalvor
01-12-2004, 07:04 AM
cant see any of it happening Donner - happy to be proved wrong though

Bling_Bling
01-12-2004, 07:18 AM
Why dont someone buy out GEN, close the operation down and keep the cash? Maybe even sell off parts of it, if there is any value left.

marinesalvor
01-12-2004, 07:32 AM
whats there to buy Bling?

Bling_Bling
01-12-2004, 07:46 AM
MS, yeah, you are probably right.

donner
01-12-2004, 03:04 PM
quote:Originally posted by marinesalvor

cant see any of it happening Donner - happy to be proved wrong though


What do you see happening MS?

marinesalvor
02-12-2004, 07:27 AM
they will just meander on till they run out of cash probably

Bling_Bling
02-12-2004, 07:52 AM
They should sell everything off and return cash back to shareholders.

duncan macgregor
02-12-2004, 08:04 AM
AH guys you forgot they might invent the grass that stops cows farting and pull themselves out the poo with Wrightsons. macdunk

marinesalvor
02-12-2004, 08:11 AM
need money and time to do that Dunk

donner
02-12-2004, 02:07 PM
Well, something is going on. The depth is beginning to look pretty crowded for GEN.

I wonder if there is good news due on the trials they are running or perhaps that merger is a goer.

donner
02-12-2004, 08:30 PM
MS, you may know this one. Just out of curiosity how many biotechs are there if any other than GEN listed on the NZX or NZAX.

I did look for the indice on Direct's site but they didn't have one.

marinesalvor
03-12-2004, 06:38 AM
NZX - BLT, BOZ, GEN, PEB
ASX - LCT, soon to be Neuren
Unlisted - Virionyx
2nd board - Pharmazen, CG Surgical

prob some others that I can remember now!
cheers

Tomahawk
06-12-2004, 12:19 PM
What is going on? Looks like 82000 buy @ market price from 12.35 today. Someone seems keen to want some.

marinesalvor
06-12-2004, 12:21 PM
impressive - wonder whats up

paul29
06-12-2004, 01:53 PM
NTA..77c how much cash have they got in the bank ?



Total Issue 26,126,802

Market Capitalisation $11,757,061 (@ 45)

Full Year Profit -13,276,000.00 (NZD)

Earnings/Share 50.8100 cents

Price/Earnings Ratio 0.8857

NTA/Share 77.1600 (NZD) cents

Dividend/Share 0.0000 (NZD) cents

Dividend Yield 0.0%


web site .www.genesis.co.nz

Tomahawk
06-12-2004, 02:11 PM
Hi Paul29,

Where did you find the information from, especially the full year profit? I thought they had a half year loss of 7.1 million?

I had a look at the website and couldn't find it. Thanks.

paul29
06-12-2004, 02:15 PM
Direct broking web site ...

Tomahawk
06-12-2004, 02:25 PM
hmm... not sure if the direct broking site got it right or perhaps I have read it incorrectly. Their half year report says an EPS of -27 cents or something similar.
If it was 50 cents, the shareprice should be at least 5 dollars on a P/E of 10.

donner
06-12-2004, 07:01 PM
MS, I am guessing but it seems to me you are closely aligned to the bio-tech industry and GEN in particular.

One comment you have consistently made is that their IP is over valued but when I read their report it seems to me that they carry a lot of it at nil value.

How do you justify such commentary?

madmike
07-12-2004, 07:55 AM
quote:Originally posted by donner

MS, I am guessing but it seems to me you are closely aligned to the bio-tech industry and GEN in particular.

One comment you have consistently made is that their IP is over valued but when I read their report it seems to me that they carry a lot of it at nil value.

How do you justify such commentary?


donner....ms may mean that as gen is making losses their ip should be reflected as a liability in the accounts!!!!

marinesalvor
08-12-2004, 08:02 AM
am in biotech as a hobby only as am wedded to boats!! - major focus is the queensland and victoria industries. have always looked at GEN as possible target for an overseas takeover

winner69
08-12-2004, 08:42 AM
Don't you invest in biotechs like GEN in the hope that they will hit the jackpot and discover a cure for something and make zillions

Fundamentals, except for cash burn, mean stuff all

If you think that GEN willactually get something worthwhile to market why sell, might want some more money though

If you think that nothing will come from their efforts get out


GEN is that sort of gamble - investment for want of a better word

marinesalvor
08-12-2004, 08:54 AM
so true w69 - you cant really financially analyse a biotech - best to look at pipeline and then further down to who in the market will actually pay for the science - one reason I like Oz biotechs - they are further down the track to the final market/product

Bling_Bling
08-12-2004, 09:53 AM
What is the future for GEN?

Bubble Boy
08-12-2004, 10:02 AM
There is no future in its current form. It will be split up and sold in parts.

donner
08-12-2004, 11:20 AM
Think about it folks. "The" flagship of NZ scientific R&D being chopped up and sold in parts by its founders. That is tantamount to throwing in the towel and saying NZ cannot foot it in science. Lets all be manual workers or call centre staff. It would be the death knell for the industry. No that won't happen.

What will?

Many things can happen. Just what happens remains to be seen.

donner
08-12-2004, 11:21 AM
Think about it folks. "The" flagship of NZ scientific R&D being chopped up and sold in parts by its founders. That is tantamount to throwing in the towel and saying NZ cannot foot it in science. Lets all be manual workers or call centre staff. It would be the death knell for the industry. No that won't happen.

What will?

Many things can happen. Just what happens remains to be seen.

marinesalvor
08-12-2004, 11:33 AM
the answer then donner?? does the govt have to step in?? how???

donner
08-12-2004, 11:40 AM
quote:Originally posted by winner69

Don't you invest in biotechs like GEN in the hope that they will hit the jackpot and discover a cure for something and make zillions

You can invest in value. IP for example, if you think there is value in it not being recognized.

Fundamentals, except for cash burn, mean stuff all

Their cashburn has been arrested.

If you think that GEN willactually get something worthwhile to market why sell, might want some more money though

They are at the end of stage II trials for AVAC. Could be a success and price should reflect this.
If you think that nothing will come from their efforts get out


GEN is that sort of gamble - investment for want of a better word

Indeed.

donner
08-12-2004, 11:43 AM
quote:Originally posted by marinesalvor

the answer then donner?? does the govt have to step in?? how???


If I was in the boardroom or had a crystal ball I could tell you what will happen. But I am not and I don't have one. I'll pick one up a the WHS and see what it says. I'm sure they are on special. What I can say with as much certainty as a guess will allow is that the founding fathers of NZ leading flagship for science won't fold or be chopped up and sold.

Bubble Boy
08-12-2004, 12:36 PM
Dont be so sure, Donner. Selling the parts is not a ludicrous as it sounds. The government is not going to come into GEN like it did to AIR. There are numerous other companies ready and willing to take the flagship space. I am tipping Neuren Pharma to be one of these. Pity it is going to the ASX.

The problem with GEN is it has too much width and not enough depth. Ol' Jimbo, the mad scientist, has jumped on every band wagon his employees have come up with and consequenlty has his fingers in too many pies. All the pies are not even in the oven yet and are years from any meaningfull revenue. The cash they have on hand cannot continue to support all these different projects.

For GEN to survive it will have to go to Weight watchers and slim down a bit. Watch for spin offs, licence deals and out right sales of IP over the next year or 2. If we are lucky, might even see a good, old fasioned, board room stoush.

donner
08-12-2004, 05:34 PM
Well it wasn't me who suggested the G may partner GEN but one has to wonder who wants a million units of GEN? Just so happens it is a little, only a little under 5%.

morv
08-12-2004, 09:08 PM
nah the hits on. the tea lady says that jimbo looked worried as sh*t all day, fats has flogged off wri insurance division and now turning to this festering sore.

Bling_Bling
09-12-2004, 09:32 AM
WRI will find it hard to sell their shares on market, there is no liquidity. WRI will have to find a buyer for their holding and take a big lost on their books.

donner
10-12-2004, 12:27 PM
Heres the Heralds take on why ACC want in on GEN. If its true, it makes you wonder what will happen if the trials are a flop. 30c here we come?

I see the volumes are up today too. I wonder if it is just a response to the article.



ACC lifts its Genesis Research holding to 6.89pc


10.12.04
By Ellen Read


The Accident Compensation Corporation is taking a punt on the success of Genesis Research's latest clinical trials, snapping up more shares ahead of the verdict.
From a holding of 4.98 per cent, the ACC now holds 6.89 per cent of the biotech company. A stock exchange notice confirmed 500,000 more shares were added to ACC's basket via on-market trades on Wednesday. Before this, ACC's holding in the company was not required to be disclosed as it sat below the 5 per cent threshold.

Genesis Research shares are worth 48c each - a fraction of the $7 they fetched during the biotech boom.

After a setback last month when Genesis' British partner SR Pharma said trials of childhood eczema drug SRP299 had failed, ACC is obviously hopeful of the latest venture.

Genesis and SR Pharma share joint rights to two potential eczema treatments - SRP299, which was developed in Britain, and AVAC, which was developed in New Zealand.

Hope now rests with AVAC and the results - including the drug's fate - are expected this month.

The company said yesterday that this was still the timeline and declined to comment further.

Last month, chief executive Jim Watson told investors that without any new investment, the company had enough cash to see it through to the end of 2007, but that new partnerships were expected to strengthen the books before then.

marinesalvor
10-12-2004, 12:42 PM
time to bet the pharm (sic) on AVAC????

Bling_Bling
10-12-2004, 01:15 PM
MS, what do you mean?

I am interested in your opinion as I too have been looking at this stock for a period now and have not bought any shares.

marinesalvor
10-12-2004, 01:31 PM
well Bling - if you are a believer and have the risk funds - then this is the point that you either 1) bet big time on AVAC doing well and pushing the price to 80c or more and make a nice gain - I would recommend you bank profits at that stage or 2) bet against AVAC and just watch

donner
10-12-2004, 01:53 PM
Oh I am sure you well know there are more strings to this bow than that MS.

AVAC is a red herring. A bonus if it comes in. If it doesn't then it is a buying opportunity.

Bling_Bling
10-12-2004, 02:14 PM
Wonder who sold their shareholdings to ACC?
What about WRI shareholding? I am sure they want to sell too.

donner
11-12-2004, 04:18 PM
quote:Originally posted by saintjohn


On the button cdt18,

but a fortune can be made from the product you mention, if patent procedure is applied to the letter.

As Genesis has.


I see GEN has quite a lot of patents and patents pending.

This from their 03 Ann.

During 2003, the patent portfolio of both Genesis and
AgriGenesis continued to grow, as evidenced by the
number of patents granted and filed. At the end of the
year, Genesis had 68 granted patents, of which 27 were
in the US. A further 130 patent applications are awaiting
the examination process in the US (23) and other
countries (107). The patent portfolio of AgriGenesis now
consists of 23 granted patents (10 in the US), and a
further 154 patent applications are pending (29 in the
US and 125 in other countries).

Do you think you could elaborate on this for us Saintjohn.

saintjohn
11-12-2004, 07:02 PM
donner

What I know is based on rumour and won’t be repeated by me, even if well founded.
Having said that and after incurring considerable losses as the SP spiraled I bailed at 50c. (Exit strategies and all that stuff.)
Also influenced to some extent by the derampers here.

However A brave punter, [u]prepared to loose all </u>may still do well out of this stock IMO.

SJ

donner
12-12-2004, 11:23 AM
Do well? I reckon you can't lose. ;)[8D]

AVAC is bonus if it comes in. If it doesn't it leaves the health side pretty redundant if you ask me. But it makes no difference to the value of GEN on the negative side.

What matters is its five percent option on Arborgen coming up in Feb.

Thats the baby.

marinesalvor
13-12-2004, 07:40 AM
good for you donner - you keep that chin up! If your boat comes in I will be the first to figuratively shake your hand

donner
13-12-2004, 09:32 AM
If you can buy a dollar for fifty cents you arenot doing too bad.

ACC must think so too. And its not as if they are a bunch of half wits.

digger
13-12-2004, 10:31 AM
Donner,always good to read the words of a brave man.And i mean just that,you have put your cards clearly on the table for all to comment on as they will. I have a stake in GEN which is my worst preformer by a country mile. Certainly one that turned to custard. At the time i wanted to get outside just oil,but GEN had too many PHD's that knew sweet f all about business. Still can't win them all so would be hoping you are somewhere near correct so i can move on. Will hold as their IP must be worth something.
There has been some movement of the SP lately so something could happen.

donner
13-12-2004, 10:41 AM
If your'e informed enough Digger you will see that this is a very similar situation to TRH.

What people can't get is that normal financial analysis doesn't apply. Value is what matters with this one.

Bling_Bling
13-12-2004, 10:55 AM
quote:Originally posted by donner

If you can buy a dollar for fifty cents you arenot doing too bad.

ACC must think so too. And its not as if they are a bunch of half wits.


Where did you get $1 valuation from? A few institutions bought into GEN during the initial listing on the NZSE at a much higher price. I think the more interesting thing is to find out who should the large parcel to ACC.

donner
13-12-2004, 10:57 AM
Blight, the fifty cents for a dollar thing is something Ron Brieley used to say. It isn't a valuation.

The seller to the ACC was Emerald Capital, I think.

donner
13-12-2004, 03:38 PM
MS, thanks for the encouragement. I will however, give you something to kiss instead.

Your opinion afterall is only as good as anyone elses. You say your work is in boats. I have met may people involved with boats and not many of them are experts in biotechs. You also provide little substance to your always defeatist posts.

So in the most polite way possible I think we can throw your opinion into the most suitable "vessel" one can think of. I can think of one that has no sail or engine to speak of.

Interesting to note that earlier on in the year RBC said they expect to add about twenty percent to their share price by raising awareness of the value of their holding in Arborgen.

It hasn't happened yet but some serious players have taken a big stake in RBC. So even the boys in New York see value in RBC/TEN and Arborgen. It must be that cos they have f all else.

So come Feb when GEN can buy that extra five percent "at market value" there will be a valuation made and from that we will be able to see just how much value is tucked away in Arborgen for both RBC and GEN.

Make no mistake. Its game on for GEN.

Bubble Boy
13-12-2004, 03:54 PM
quote:Originally posted by donner


Make no mistake. Its game on for GEN.




I am with you on that comment, donner. We are going to see a bit of action over the comming months. Its a good gamble for the high risk portion of the portfolio. I dont think it will go lower. Obviously ACC have a similar view.:)

I still favour the split up. Here's my theory. GEN will retain the human theraputics and everything else will go, at a price of course. I think you will see Arbourgen spun off or sold off to fund the human trials. If RBC/TEN are right this will be for a pretty penny. With a bit of luck, shareholders will get to see some cash as these things go. Maybe even shares in another company as the plant research is spun out. [?]

Punters will end up with a slimmed down GEN, cash, and maybe shares in a second company with a combined value well in excess of 50c.[8D]

donner
13-12-2004, 08:16 PM
quote:Originally posted by digger

Donner,always good to read the words of a brave man.And i mean just that,you have put your cards clearly on the table for all to comment on as they will. I have a stake in GEN which is my worst preformer by a country mile. Certainly one that turned to custard. At the time i wanted to get outside just oil,but GEN had too many PHD's that knew sweet f all about business. Still can't win them all so would be hoping you are somewhere near correct so i can move on. Will hold as their IP must be worth something.
There has been some movement of the SP lately so something could happen.


Digger,

Your reply says to me, as a result of your post donner, I will not sell (even if I were tempted to should the price cave in as a result of failure in AVAC).

If this is correct, then I am rapt because this is the effect I want that post to have.

It will be the retail end of GEN that has watched their wealth be destroyed who will sell out for nix on the next round of bad news. That will send the price lower and I am sure someone will be happy to keep it lower.

This is what needs to be avoided.

madmike
13-12-2004, 09:31 PM
quote:Originally posted by Bubble Boy
[br
I am with you on that comment, donner. We are going to see a bit of action over the comming months. Its a good gamble for the high risk portion of the portfolio. I dont think it will go lower. Obviously ACC have a similar view.:)

I still favour the split up. Here's my theory. GEN will retain the human theraputics and everything else will go, at a price of course. I think you will see Arbourgen spun off or sold off to fund the human trials. If RBC/TEN are right this will be for a pretty penny. With a bit of luck, shareholders will get to see some cash as these things go. Maybe even shares in another company as the plant research is spun out. [?]

Punters will end up with a slimmed down GEN, cash, and maybe shares in a second company with a combined value well in excess of 50c.[8D]


bubbleboy
not to sure you have the right scenario here.

the gen split (health vs forest/others) was to get more funding for forest/others...there has been no takers for the funding (ie put cash in for a slice of the forets/others company).

i think "the old doc" doesn't want to loose control of it all as he can see "real upside" if something comes off.......really the market is only valuing the company for its cash in bank and giving no value at all to the research or patents that donner has pointed out. come on, even in the worse scenario gen could sell their current research and petents for a good sum if push came to shove....the market is worried about a call for capital or a firesale on the research/patents.

so whats going to happen!!!

i'm with donner...there's some big players in arborgen and if gen has a right to buy another 5% then i see gen as a bit of a kingpin in it all. now the problem is...does gen have the $$$$ to get 5%. the company (gen) in its latest news release has again hinted at "partnerships" so maybe!!!!........(btw is this continuous disclosure...ie who are they talking to!!!)

if you think the health side will have a favourable outcome in the next 2 weeks (and you have the balls like acc.....they have been a very good investor of late) buy now....if you think that the health side wil not preform then wait till after xmas to buy

but i think that the true value of gen will son be known by feb 2005

ari
14-12-2004, 03:57 PM
quote:and you have the balls like acc
only difference is, they are not playing with their balls......:D

madmike
14-12-2004, 06:22 PM
quote:Originally posted by ari


quote:and you have the balls like acc
only difference is, they are not playing with their balls......:D


seems like they are playing with the farmers balls!!!!

to those not in the know farmers acc premiums have gone up 40% odd (don't quote me on the % but it is dramatic)

morv
14-12-2004, 07:16 PM
feb 5 could bcome an interesting crunch day as gen been cash burning at incendery rate, wont have the cough up price if rbc get the value up.

Ngapuke
14-12-2004, 08:30 PM
quote:Originally posted by morv

feb 5 could bcome an interesting crunch day as gen been cash burning at incendery rate, wont have the cough up price if rbc get the value up.


I agree with you, Morv. Feb 10th is the 5th anniversary of the creation of Arborgen, so some time around then (give or take a month or 2) something should happen w.r.t. the Arborgen holding. I'm sure that 5 years ago when GEN were given their 5% equity plus 5% option, 10 Feb 2005 seemed an awfully long way away :) The option allows GEN to acquire the extra 5% "at market value", so what intrigues me is whether this market value will be made public.

If GEN go for a rights issue to fund the purchase (as Donner suggests) then they'll surely want to make Arborgen's 'market value' public. However if Mr Moriarty and friends at RBC covet GEN's 5% + 5% option, and have designs on it, then they'll wish to keep ARborgen's true market value a secret for a little longer I would have thought.

Meantime I've been happy to take an each-way bet by increasing my holdings in both companies.... though I think GEN has the better upside (albeit with much higher volatility).

marinesalvor
15-12-2004, 07:24 AM
Thanks Donner - nice of you to stoop to personal abuse. Consider myself retired from any thread you are involved with

donner
15-12-2004, 08:29 AM
Sorry you feel that way MS.

Its only two weeks or so before the AVAC trials are known and noone is talking about them. I think everyone knows the real value is in the forestry. The AVAC is a bit liek one of NOG's oil drills. Hopeful for success but no real loss of value if it fails. Just big disappointment.

Ngapuke says,

However if Mr Moriarty and friends at RBC covet GEN's 5% + 5% option, and have designs on it, then they'll wish to keep ARborgen's true market value a secret for a little longer I would have thought.

It is precisely for this reason why I feel GEN is a takeover target. It will be tough though. If its not a blatant in your face take over bid, then they may do something funny with either the rights issue or attempt to recapitalize GEN themselves by taking an equity stake.

Personally, I would like to see a run of the mill rights issue, increase liquidity and an education programme to holders about the value in GEN. Then we may see a return of the wealth destroyed so far.

Not once I have I seen from them an indication of revenues from their IP. It is in the reports but they need to be singing it from the rooftops. GAAP regulations stipulate IP and patents to be carried at nil value. I would like them to ascribe a market value to it and tell us about it but still carry it at nil value. Its like they need two accounts the GAAP ones and one for the investors to understand the inherent value in GEN. So far in nearly all correspondence I have read the author(s) get sidetracked on the science and start boring the reader with potential and promises and how it all works.

They really have missed the mark with the investing public.

digger
15-12-2004, 10:11 AM
Well Donner i take your point that Arborgen is worth the gamble regardless of the outcome of AVAC. Will hold to the end game ,as i have lost so much already what is another few thousand.
Your comments an imput on this topic are appreciated.

morv
15-12-2004, 11:45 AM
has arbo really got a value ,only bout 8 people left in agri and no one doing arbo work,disgruntlement between various parties about each others worth, and no royalty due to 2010/2011

Ngapuke
15-12-2004, 12:07 PM
quote:Originally posted by morv

has arbo really got a value ,only bout 8 people left in agri and no one doing arbo work,disgruntlement between various parties about each others worth, and no royalty due to 2010/2011


Are you perhaps referring to Agrigenesis, rather than Arborgen?

morv
15-12-2004, 02:57 PM
2 the best of my knowledge agri did work for arbo. now finished. and arbo intershareholder relationships have been fractious. only based on rumour,innuendo and the tea lady.

donner
15-12-2004, 03:17 PM
Well that is encouraging news Morv.

It makes GEN's 5% just that more valuable. Balance of power and all that.

Plus according to RBC, the RBC/GEN EST database is crucial to the success of Arborgen's work. So Arbo does have a value unless Horizon2 (CHH&RBC) are trying to spirit away the IP. Is this the source of the friction?

donner
15-12-2004, 04:45 PM
I wonder if there are any disputes with IP or patent ownership between the groups.

madmike
15-12-2004, 05:59 PM
quote:Originally posted by donner

Not once I have I seen from them an indication of revenues from their IP. It is in the reports but they need to be singing it from the rooftops. GAAP regulations stipulate IP and patents to be carried at nil value. I would like them to ascribe a market value to it and tell us about it but still carry it at nil value. Its like they need two accounts the GAAP ones and one for the investors to understand the inherent value in GEN. So far in nearly all correspondence I have read the author(s) get sidetracked on the science and start boring the reader with potential and promises and how it all works.

They really have missed the mark with the investing public.


donner... whats the situ re mastheads and gaap???

donner
15-12-2004, 06:11 PM
quote:Originally posted by madmike


quote:Originally posted by donner

Not once I have I seen from them an indication of revenues from their IP. It is in the reports but they need to be singing it from the rooftops. GAAP regulations stipulate IP and patents to be carried at nil value. I would like them to ascribe a market value to it and tell us about it but still carry it at nil value. Its like they need two accounts the GAAP ones and one for the investors to understand the inherent value in GEN. So far in nearly all correspondence I have read the author(s) get sidetracked on the science and start boring the reader with potential and promises and how it all works.

They really have missed the mark with the investing public.


donner... whats the situ re mastheads and gaap???


Gee whizz. You got me there MM. Maybe MS can help us out.

I guess if there is a gap in the masthead you could have either a bad connection on your electronics or water in the saloon.

madmike
15-12-2004, 07:23 PM
quote:Originally posted by donner


quote:Originally posted by madmike


quote:Originally posted by donner

Not once I have I seen from them an indication of revenues from their IP. It is in the reports but they need to be singing it from the rooftops. GAAP regulations stipulate IP and patents to be carried at nil value. I would like them to ascribe a market value to it and tell us about it but still carry it at nil value. Its like they need two accounts the GAAP ones and one for the investors to understand the inherent value in GEN. So far in nearly all correspondence I have read the author(s) get sidetracked on the science and start boring the reader with potential and promises and how it all works.

They really have missed the mark with the investing public.


donner... whats the situ re mastheads and gaap???


Gee whizz. You got me there MM. Maybe MS can help us out.

I guess if there is a gap in the masthead you could have either a bad connection on your electronics or water in the saloon.


bad form there donner

mastheads are names like "nz herald" "melbourne age" etc....these are held in the books as an asset and when there was wilson & horton the words "nz hearld" had a carrying value of millions.

now why i brought this up was what is the value of names such as "reductil" (fat reducing medicine), "prozac", "viagra"...now you say the patent on these medicines is zero in the accounts according to gaap but what about the names (masthead) of these medicines....everyman over the age of ??? knows viagra is and what it can do

so you are spouting gaap......if you are just quoting the gen accounts re gaap then fair enough

but otherwise!!!!!

what you quote you should understand

from my following of gen it is gen itself that have decided to value their r&d at $0 until they think the product is commercially viable...not because of gaap

now gen has registered patents therefore they feel that there is something to "protect" (ie an asset) hence they should really put a value to the product..perhaps via masthead (more than one way to skin a cat) or if gaap doesn't cover mastheads then under continuous disclosure

we therefore both come to the same conclusion of your last sentence
"They really have missed the mark with the investing public."

which is the base of this entire thread...the public has not been informed of the true value of the company which has been to the direct detriment of the shareholder

point of my post....you should understand what you write when you are pushing a stock....i dont want you to become a like ms donner!!!!????

saintjohn
15-12-2004, 07:41 PM
Done a macdunk there donner....leaves you minus a foot.

duncan macgregor
15-12-2004, 07:59 PM
Hey guys, if you think its worth it go for it. This one is a clanger hope you prove me wrong. Thats what makes the market i buy this you buy that. Sometimes you are right and i am wrong good fun eh!?.
macdunk

donner
15-12-2004, 08:24 PM
Yes a cheap swipe. I agree. Its just that of late I have become more than a little suspicious of Marinesalvors motives for posting on GEN. Nevertheless it was borne from a misunderstanding as you rightly point out.

But now that you mention it it just so happens I was reading about valuing patents on the weekend. You are right to associate them with mastheads. I would call them brand names.

The literature I had, more or less stated that the valuing of patents was still leading edge stuff and very variable but was on the whole based upon the same principles as valuing a brand. This is far more widely understood by way of accordance with GAAP regs.

And on doing a double check on my GAAP quotation, I find you are right. GEN carries all IP and patents etc at nil value as a policy not in accordance with GAAP. I was confused with their options accounting policy which is in accordance with GAAP.

But come on. Everything I write is here is on the fly and by memory from something I've read.

I did come across one interesting web site though that says if you make an application for valuation of any registered patent then they will value it for you. About $100US a throw.

And if you are really interested check this out.

http://patentclaim.com/updir/52_naava_Patstrat%209-2003.pdf

saintjohn
15-12-2004, 08:42 PM
A simple sorry to madmike and marinesalvor might do the trick

donner
15-12-2004, 08:52 PM
I see Gary Weiss is on the board of RBC. It goes then that GEN is more likely than not to have a dispute on its hands in regards to the legal claims of patent and IP.

Boy, if this is so. There must be something really important in all of this.

madmike
16-12-2004, 08:16 AM
quote:Originally posted by donner

I see Gary Weiss is on the board of RBC. It goes then that GEN is more likely than not to have a dispute on its hands in regards to the legal claims of patent and IP.

Boy, if this is so. There must be something really important in all of this.


great posting donner...just trying to keep you on the straight and narrow!!! so people like ms can't accuse you of something down the line

why has it taken so long for someone to come up with some method of valuing these things....companies have to give out info of how many people they pay over 100K by way of note to the accounts, why not put out a value range for a patent

and with gen and the ski slope share price...shouldn't they have tried harder to inform the market of what the true value of the company is

donner
16-12-2004, 04:44 PM
Its interesting to note that when a company goes for a rights issue the price usually bombs out of sight.

If GEN goes for one do you think the price will bomb?

They are valued according to cash in bank so if it does it means you will be buying it for less than the cash on hand value.

Madness if it does. I'm poised anyhow.

Ngapuke
17-12-2004, 08:11 AM
Of course this is all highly speculative anyway ... rights issue mightn't even be on the cards.

But if it is, maybe floating off Agrigenesis might be an option. That way that market would be presented with a new co. and the valuation can be linked to its intrinsic worth. Perhaps such an (IPO?) for Agrigenesis mightn't even be on the NZX?

(A rights issue for GEN would be tied to the current low market price for GEN shares, wouldn't it? Something of a handicap, I would have thought...)

madmike
17-12-2004, 08:14 AM
quote:Originally posted by donner

Its interesting to note that when a company goes for a rights issue the price usually bombs out of sight.

If GEN goes for one do you think the price will bomb?

They are valued according to cash in bank so if it does it means you will be buying it for less than the cash on hand value.

Madness if it does. I'm poised anyhow.


20% gain off shareprice low of 44c
seems like your postings donner is causing a rally!!!
no the acc move has caused it just like the wri move help the shareprice stay above $1 when they moved in

yes i would think that the price will bomb for a rights issue
but, who is going to underwrite the issue....wri/rbc/or some broker?
i think that the price will bomb before xmas as i doubt there will be good avac news re the trials....thats when i'll buy...i'm a firm believer in the big value of arborgen

donner
17-12-2004, 08:36 AM
Thats the big question MM. Will AVAC be a fizzer or a success. If you don't get in now you could be paying another twenty percent in a few weeks. If you do get in now you can average down if it goes the other way.

Or RBC could move in before the rights issue.

If they go for a rights issue they will then have to make public the value of GEN to convince people to take up their rights. Therefore making it more difficult for RBC to take them out.

And don't underestimate the effects of the illiquidity.

Ngapuke
17-12-2004, 10:40 AM
I'm pleased to see that Stephen Hall has been appointed as new GM. He mightn't be a 'big' name, but I think he'll be excellent in the position. Most of all, he'll be an astute and very capable negotiator for GEN over the next critical few months.

Lawso
17-12-2004, 12:55 PM
Never hear of him 'til now. Tell us more, Ngapuke.

Ngapuke
17-12-2004, 06:10 PM
quote:Originally posted by Lawso

Never hear of him 'til now. Tell us more, Ngapuke.

Have never met him, but he's always answered my occasional email or phone queries diligently and skillfully. I've sent him these as a shareholder who's seen his investment drop several $100k in value over the past couple of years, so I have seldom been a 'happy chappy'!

Has an excellent 'bedside' manner - manages to tread the fine line between responding to S/holder concerns without giving away any info that isn't already in the public domain (damn!)

So I figure he'd be an astute negotiator, or poker player ;)

Besides - I feel that with all that the staff at GEN have had to deal with over the past year: Boardroom discontent, disappointment with Peter Lee's arrival then departure, significant staff layoffs, .... the last thing they needed was The Next Great Hope. A big noter who would come in and be expected to single-handedly save the day.

madmike
17-12-2004, 06:14 PM
quote:Originally posted by Ngapuke

I'm pleased to see that Stephen Hall has been appointed as new GM. He mightn't be a 'big' name, but I think he'll be excellent in the position. Most of all, he'll be an astute and very capable negotiator for GEN over the next critical few months.


whoa...international talent search for new gm and then they promote from within!!!!!.....someone thought this was sh*t and dumped....maybe they thought that stephen hall maybe a jimbo clone!!!!

Lawso
17-12-2004, 06:58 PM
Stephen Hall, M Com (Hons), CA, CTP. Head of Corporate Services . . . responsible for Finance, Human Resources, Legal and Information Technology.

Above is from the annual report. I've been in GEN since '99 but had never been aware of his existence until now. He's obviously a money/admin man, not a scientist, and it's good to hear Ngapuke speak well of him. Remember also that the new chairman, Jim McLean, is both M Sc (Hons) and ACA, and a former partner in Ernst & Young.

I reckon some smart asses on this site should give these guys a break, and I speak as one who seen several thou $$s go down the drain.

madmike
18-12-2004, 08:23 AM
quote:Originally posted by Lawso

Stephen Hall, M Com (Hons), CA, CTP. Head of Corporate Services . . . responsible for Finance, Human Resources, Legal and Information Technology.

Above is from the annual report. I've been in GEN since '99 but had never been aware of his existence until now. He's obviously a money/admin man, not a scientist, and it's good to hear Ngapuke speak well of him. Remember also that the new chairman, Jim McLean, is both M Sc (Hons) and ACA, and a former partner in Ernst & Young.

I reckon some smart asses on this site should give these guys a break, and I speak as one who seen several thou $$s go down the drain.


yes well "these guys" have let the shareprice slide from $8 to 44c. to me "these guys" have not been out there actively informing the market of gen's true value....as donner has said the market is valuing gen at its cash in bank and nothing else.
now what about those shareholders yesterday that dumped 75k of shares. what if in february we find out that arbogen is worth 50c a share to gen. "these guys" must know this now so those shareholders have lossed out.
also, on this site their has been strong criterism of jimbo re his heading of a publicly listed company. now, "these guys" were at gen at the same time all this was happening so if they couldn't help jimbo (with all their commercial accumin) get his relationship right with shareholders and the market right what makes you think they have the ability to get it right now.
thats why i think new blood would have been better for gen....to tout an international search for a ceo and then hire from within seems all a waste of more money to me

donner
19-12-2004, 09:18 AM
After checking out the US Patent Office yesterday I discovered that just recently, last few months, GEN and GEN/RBC have registered two new patents.

They are particularly difficult to understand due to the science jargon but it appears to my lay mind that the GE cloning and lignin removal technology exists and is owned by GEN and RBC.

If this is the breakthrough then I can imagine that dear Luke Moriarty and his buddies must be gnashing at the teeth for complete ownership.

And what easier way to do it than to make a hit on GEN. Damn those WRI guys. They must have known something all along.

Also, if we think that four years ago GEN was worth $7 and that over the last four years the few things that have fundamentally changed have been the failure of PVAC, severe cash burn and lets assume the failure of AVAC. Then if we were to say that amounts to a loss of 75% (very liberal) of value then 25% of $7 is still $1.75. A long way from 50c. Got to be good.

Ngapuke, the rights issue is speculation. What is not is that this company needs new capital and that the shareholders have lost massive wealth. So if you are the "new" CEO and need to find capital you would try to do it so that the existing shareholders will have the chance to have their wealth restored. That doesn't leave many options. But a float and IPO at high prices might be the way. Especially in this climate. Especially with a discount put on the new price for existing shareholders. But then I already own AgGen why do I want to pay for it twice?

Bling_Bling
20-12-2004, 07:58 AM
The writing is on the wall. Are they preparing us for AVAC to fail?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?c_id=3&ObjectID=9003943

Cooper
20-12-2004, 11:08 AM
quote:Originally posted by Bling_Bling

The writing is on the wall. Are they preparing us for AVAC to fail?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?c_id=3&ObjectID=9003943

Agree. Article doesn't exactly exude positivity does it?

Cooper
22-12-2004, 10:33 AM
Genesis Research Announces Results of Phase II Trial of AVAC

Genesis Research and Development Corporation (NZX/ASX:GEN) today announced that the Phase II trial of its childhood eczema therapeutic candidate, AVAC, failed to meet the primary efficacy endpoint of improving eczema symptoms compared to placebo. The AVAC paediatric atopic dermatitis programme will be terminated.
The primary measure of treatment efficacy was the change in SASSAD (six-area six-sign atopic dermatitis) score, an indicator of eczema severity. Analysis of the data showed that there was no statistically significant difference in SASSAD improvement between the placebo and AVAC-treated patient groups. Both treatments were safe and well-tolerated.

Stephen Hall, CEO of Genesis, commented, "The result of the trial is clearly disappointing, but will not have a significant impact on the company, which is focusing on the development of an RNAi therapeutic for asthma and atopic dermatitis."

Mr Hall noted that the AVAC trial had been conducted to an extremely high standard, meeting very challenging timelines, and was a credit to the study team members. The trial was led by Professor Innes Asher and Dr Wendy Walker, with The University of Auckland, Kidz First and Starship contributing clinical and research expertise.

"We recognise that clinical trials involving children require special planning, and that the expertise of the study team has been crucial to the successful completion of the trial on schedule."

"We value the experience we have gained in taking a second product from discovery through pre-clinical and early clinical development, to Phase II clinical trial. The pre-clinical testing systems and disease models now in place at Genesis are already proving very useful for our RNAi programme. In addition, by carrying out our own Phase II trial in New Zealand we have confirmed Genesis' ability to conduct high quality early phase clinical trials."

This randomised, blinded, placebo-controlled trial studied 128 children aged from 5 to 16 years who suffered from childhood eczema. All except four completed the six-month period of clinical assessment. The trial started in September 2003, full enrolment was achieved by the end of June 2004, and the last patient assessment was conducted in December 2004.