hi ahjay, if you read the original post by fewpennies it’s...

hi ahjay, if you read the original post by fewpennies it’s pretty clear that he is linking the possibility of dividends to payment of licensing royalties.
FPs post gave a scenario in which there is clear evidence of effectiveness, clever licensing deals with big pharmaceutical companies, and a big impact in the oncology market. As such it’s a great scenario but of course there are huge risks and hurdles.....
1 whilst there are early indications of effectiveness there will of course be the need for further trials. Looks really good so far but so did other failures not least ftt. I’m intrigued by the theory behind this treatment though.
2 so far there are no safety issues identified but as such a new technology I’m sure the fda will want further proof of this. The mechanism of this drug has the potential for future side effects which are still to be known.
3 there could be competing treatments or competitors with similar B cell technology, although IMU seem to have robust patent protection.
4 the company could sell the technology in an early takeover. If there’s any interest, of course. That would be such a shame as the long term potential could be huge, if other hurdles are dealt with. I’m reassured by the presence of Paul Hopper as chairman, and in also Axel Hoos (is that the right spelling?!) on the board....if anyone knows how to structure a good deal it must be him.
5 why would Axel H be wasting his time on this Board if he didn’t have a high level of confidence? His presence means more than all these HC threads combined.......
so I take FPs analysis as an intriguing possibility, which could happen is everything falls into place, but of course the likelihood of that happening is a bit limited. Worthy of further thought though.