Clinuvel

[Frogster]

Well I dont quite understand why his position isn't listed, neihter in the annual report 2022, nor in the report 2023. For all the other KPMs it is listed:

View attachment 5209

In 2022 as well as 2023 report it is like that.

That section of the AR talks about Board functioning, the Directors, their experience and their holdings. Keamy is not a Director so he's not presented in as much detail. He is Company Secretary (as well as CFO) so he helps organise and minute the Board meetings but he doesn't vote at them though. His technical function in support of the Board is what gets him mentioned there. (Side note: those bios are not perfect and complete. I note that, in error, Blijdorp is not listed as having been a B&S Director in the last 3 years). Dennis Wright (the only other KMP) is not mentioned in that section because, I presume, he has no role in organising Board meetings. It's maybe a little strange at first glance, but there's a difference in the job of those photographed listed.

They've not declared Keamy's holdings in that section, but the data is in the AR, in at least two other places in fact. The holdings of both Keamy (178,588) and Wright (156,874) as of 30/06/23 are shown on p75 (as shown by JohnnyH) and also on p117 as of 15/08/23 at position 16 and 18 respectively in the "Top 20" list of registered holders (not the same as the top 20 beneficial owners!!!!).

 

[Clinhope]

CEO Letter to shareholders:

http://imagesignal.commsec.com.au/docserver/02713420.pdf?fileid=02713420&datedir=20230919&edt=MjAyMy0wOS0xOSswOTozODozNisxMjArMCtjb21zZWMrcmVkaXJlY3QrL2ltYWdlc2lnbmFsL2Vycm9ycGFnZXMvUERGVGltZW91dC5odG1sKy9pbWFnZXNpZ25hbC9lcnJvcnBhZ2VzL3BkZmRlbGF5ZWQuanNw

 

[Clinhope]

As usual I appreciate his ability to summarise the complexity of the Clinuvel story.
But nothing is new as far as I can tell and he is defending his team for the upcoming AGM.
He is undoubtedly comfortable with the progress and plans of Clinuvel.
However, constantly dangling a carrot if front of investors and pulling it away from them just as they think they will bite down has to come to an end.

 

[Johnny H]

Does "recoil" have a different definition in Australian English?

No reason.

 

[macgyver]

CUV105 sample goes from 150 to up to 200.

In the last strategic update they said they were in final preparations for CUV105 with n=150. Then they announce the formation of an vitiligo expert panel to advise on the design of the trial.

Its never straight with these guys.

 

[Clinhope]

Does "recoil" have a different definition in Australian English?

No reason.

I guess it depends on the context but I believe it's the same as U.S and British english.
To recoil as in move away from something/someone is probably more common.
The recoil of something would normally be used to describe something which goes back to its original position.

 

[Klomp]

So what was the point of that newsletter? Recapping the same thing they have countless other times.
Clearly the point of the letter was unveiled on the last page. This is a CEO fighting for the Chairman. Has anybody ever seen this before? I certainly can understand a Chairman or Board lobbying to keep the Board in tact. But I can't say that I have seen a CEO lobby for the Board. The Board are not part of the management team. They are shareholders representatives. The CEO should work with whomever shareholders elect to the Board. Voting off a Board member does not necessarily imply that Shareholders are not supportive of management or the strategy. It may mean they want to change the composition of the Board for any number of potential reasons.
The CEO and the management team are NOT the company. They are a contracted counterparty to the company. A counterparty. I find it entirely inappropriate that the CEO would use his platform to lobby for the Chairman. In doing so, he is trying to imply that a vote for the Chairman will result in monumental change to the company - management and strategy.
How is the independence between the Chairman and CEO? The standards in the governance structure never fail to disappoint.

 

[macgyver]

So what was the point of that newsletter? Recapping the same thing they have countless other times.

How dare you. I did not see any quote saying "Let me take you back to 1980..."

 

[balimike]

Must be my current mood but to begin the letter with the 25% lift in dividend is an insult to my intelligence. This is a redistribution of some $500,000. Lordy I'm being cared for.
The DNA and stroke update is then summerised by announcing that the short term aim is to move these small trials to clinical studies. Well duuuh. Surely a short (cough) term aim deserves a start date announcement. Duration estimate would be a bonus.
Otherwise things will be announced sometime in the next financial year.... 9 months till that year starts.
Yes I'm enthused.

 

[Johnny H]

The recoil of something would normally be used to describe something which goes back to its original position.

I've never heard of it used synonymously with "rebound".

As a noun, recoil is a force opposite the direction of a projectile, but Wolgen used it as a verb, where it means to shrink away in disgust or horror. I certainly don't want Clinuvel's market value to do that.

 

[johnnytech]

But nothing is new as far as I can tell and he is defending his team for the upcoming AGM.

The story of people loyalty no longer matters. Stock price is supreme. Even if the bonus plan is purely 100% stock price based, or even better, straight up stock options, I will still vote NO on the remuneration plan because we’ve been trained that a 1st strike is the only language they respond to from shareholders. And the stock price is the only language I respond to now at this point.

 

[chemist]

I would have liked a firm statement as to when the multiple references to give year plans actually started because the way things are moving it's like we're at day one