Well-known member
@Sherlock It was a serious answer, although somewhat glib.

The afemelanotide technology itself is pretty much bulletproof. The closest competition (MT-7117) is a few years behind, has some potential safety issues that might make it impractical outside of tiny patient populations, and won't even work in most of the other indications that Clinuvel is going for.

The biggest risk, by far, is the inability of management to execute and deliver on the future pipeline. We're in the fortunate position that we don't have to worry about whether our product is safe or will work in future indications. We do, however, have uncertainty about the company's ability to prove it to regulatory agencies and gain approval.

It's not a specific criticism of any employee or board member, but a blanket statement that, relatively speaking, it's the biggest risk to the CUV share price right now. Other relevant factors have been mostly or completely de-risked.
Thanks; understood, and agreed.
Long story short: management built a brilliant Lamborghini and now have no clue on how to start it. But once they get it going....


Well-known member
I just stumbled across this video from Oct. 2020 explaining (in German) why the ongoing CUV 801 trials are promising, based on previous studies on mice (where only a single MSH was used) even starting the treatment 9 hours after a stroke ...
maybe some of our German-speaking friends would like to translate and comment on this video,
I still have to go to work,

Also related is the attached pdf file regarding the Evaluation of the role of the melanocortin receptor system in ischemia-reperfusion P.M Holloway 2013


Active member

I can only describe how I understand why NDP-a-MSH is superior to other MC-Agonists.

Long Story Short:

NDP-a-MSH is a non-selective Melanocortin Agonist and binds to every MCR.
See attached from p.144 the binding affinity from other Agonists compared to NDP-a-MSH.

Read p.189ff this will show why afamelanotid is better than competitors imo



Staff member
@Sherlock if you listen only to Dr Wally, you might think Clinuvel has a dozen rejections from the FDA.

FDA cannot reject something that is not asked for. Management has to ask for it. The registration system for patients with the specialty centers.... that was Clinuvel's solution offered up voluntarily without being asked.

Please go ahead and discuss FDA and regulatory pushback. I'm just tired of "OMG WE ARE SAFE. DAMN YOU TO HELL FDA".

Edit: I think my real frustration with Dr Wally is I've seen quite astute and logical thinking from him in the past, I just wish it wasn't buried so deep and he'd use his talents elsewhere.


Well-known member
For our Aussie friends - are CUV’s occasional anemic trading days, i.e. less than 30k shares for a billion dollar company, an outlier for the ASX or does this happen with other companies as well? Clearly, the registry of shareholders needs to be expanded greatly to get any traction.
General comment here is that most people in Oz see property as the best means of wealth creation and stock trading as more of a gamble so are few stocks are heavily traded but most are not. There are stats that show compared to our mates in the USA we have lower levels of stock ownership (not counting Superannuation compulsory savings) and lower levels of even having a stock trading account and quality stocks that can exhibit consistent growth are not common on the Australian exchange its often mainly banks or cyclical mining stocks... But this little ripper is showing some good $$$$ growth now just waiting 4 some SP action......

CUV Quote (Yesterday's close)

Time: 4:10PM AEST
Price: 28.42
Volume: 27475