If the analysis ever makes it's way into the public domain, and is thorough, thoughtful, complete and fairly balances proven capabilities against development plans then I'm sure it'll be welcomed by all who have an open mind no matter their current opinion. If it's biased towards being a PR piece it probably won't change many opinions at this stage.
Clinuvel
- Thread starter johnnytech
- Start date
1. I say there is little loss of focus to removal of the chair. On the contrary, having a top pharma A-lister with solid experience would be extremely desirable. I don’t think there are many people to comment to the contrary. I can think of two. First one was me about 2 years ago, which I’ve changed my opinion. And you above.
2. Yes I have evidence. Please checkout this forum called sharetease.com and read the history. As soon as the chair is gone, I do believe there will be a renewed interest from institutional investors because it signals a shift.
3. Your response to a question about fair CEO compensation is you trust the CEO to start a share buyback when the CEO needs money?
4. Let me get this straight. You don’t care about the current stock price, but you care about other people’s opinions about the current stock price? Since you care so much about us, why don’t you sell your shares @ $2 to me. That will cheer me up.
Chrizzly was your enemy because he was a shorter. Everybody else here is long and wants the best for Clinuvel. You have an odd way to make both sides exhausted of you. We are just as tired of you as we were of Chrizzly.
My mind has been ticking over regarding the one income stream of EPP.
The statement is that current market penetration is only 4%.
Is that a simple maths exercise ie annual revenue divided by either 4 or 6 injections per annum divided by price per injection equals net patients?
Importantly where does the 100% potential come from.
Dr Wally believes that price is the inhibitor of growth. I think it can't be that basic because of the very low 4%.
Clinuvel does grow every year so that 4% must be a growth result at this stage.
Clinuvel has stated that they are increasing access /distribution by dramatically increasing the number of centres. That's a common tactic to increase penetration eg MacDonalds outlets.
What other information do they hold eg is that 4% common to all countries?
The marketing issue here is that the product works.
It has no customer churn so satisfaction is extremely high.
Clinuvel seems to have relationships with the various bodies that have formed to champion the plight of EPP sufferers.
I have no knowledge of how these molecules are created and packaged so have no idea if increasing production ie numbers of units has any cost benefits . Being that cost per unit decreases with economies of scale and therefore price can be reduced. Or does the quality controls needed prohibit this "mass" approach.
Dr Wally is correct when he quantifies the rewards ie the from a low 4% to .....? It should be seen as low hanging fruit.
There has to be some simple path to increase this. Distribution is being explored in the States.
I am seeking other members thoughts...to take our thinking away from bickering.
The statement is that current market penetration is only 4%.
Is that a simple maths exercise ie annual revenue divided by either 4 or 6 injections per annum divided by price per injection equals net patients?
Importantly where does the 100% potential come from.
Dr Wally believes that price is the inhibitor of growth. I think it can't be that basic because of the very low 4%.
Clinuvel does grow every year so that 4% must be a growth result at this stage.
Clinuvel has stated that they are increasing access /distribution by dramatically increasing the number of centres. That's a common tactic to increase penetration eg MacDonalds outlets.
What other information do they hold eg is that 4% common to all countries?
The marketing issue here is that the product works.
It has no customer churn so satisfaction is extremely high.
Clinuvel seems to have relationships with the various bodies that have formed to champion the plight of EPP sufferers.
I have no knowledge of how these molecules are created and packaged so have no idea if increasing production ie numbers of units has any cost benefits . Being that cost per unit decreases with economies of scale and therefore price can be reduced. Or does the quality controls needed prohibit this "mass" approach.
Dr Wally is correct when he quantifies the rewards ie the from a low 4% to .....? It should be seen as low hanging fruit.
There has to be some simple path to increase this. Distribution is being explored in the States.
I am seeking other members thoughts...to take our thinking away from bickering.
Dr Wally
Well-known member
Cheers for the reply. Hopefully we can get a discussion going on this subject and hopefully get some answers at the upcoming AGM because it’s incredibly important. A mere 2-4% penetration after years is providing little confidence instead its causing a great amount of concern for many.
EPP is our only approved indication and could be for years to come. Surely with some smart, effective management decisions and working with rational regulators sincerely concerned ONLY with scenesse cost so like you say it’s the “low hanging fruit” that would be easy to achieve, so why would he not talk to these people, make a deal and get some much needed runs on the board?. I don’t understand.
I see EPP as the foundation Indication that the company builds everything else off of but obviously Wolgen doesn’t for some strange reason judging by all the time and money he’s wasted on ridiculous unrelated garbage (seemingly only done to trigger / attain free CUV) that should have gone into exploiting the EPP opportunity that’s been wasting away for years already.
EPP is not fully accepted but has been approved by EMA and FDA because of supreme safety profile (in my opinion). Everything else is pie in the sky, and years after first being discussed with little to no definitive progress, they are causing more harm than good because there’s F all progress and so so many missed timeframes.
Its absolutely insane to me that EPP is literally wasting away when its so successful and literally transformative for the lucky few that have access to it.
More jurisdictions approving scenesse and growing sales (even at a substantially discounted price) is essential right now and only good things can come from this no?
Last edited:
Albatross Ad Infinitum
Well-known member
1. If OTCs will be one of the big, new revenue drivers, then we already have the best Chair we could ask for--someone who already built a distributor-type business.
2. That's not an answer. Can you show something specific? I don't recall that you did that before, so until proven otherwise, you're just speculating.
3. Who are you to decide what's fair? Sounds like a top-down, anti-capitalist approach.
4. Only day traders and price manipulators care about the stock price today. If it's not where it needs to be by 1/1/26, then it's a problem.
This site used to have useful postings by apparent long-term investors. Today's it's just a bashing site, looking to find doom and gloom in a stock with years of continued growth, no debt and a war chest big enough to fund new indications. I guess bad stocks don't get bashed, only good ones are targets.
Albatross Ad Infinitum
Well-known member
Go comment on a stock that you actually own. Your interest in Clinuvel is the sketchiest of any poster here.
