This ones a heck of a specualive investment but it seems that the institutions are willing to stomp up the cash to back it in the long term.

Heres the latest news from Killik stocbrokers on the company..........

MEDICAL MARKETING Joint Venture

We recently highlighted Medical Marketing (MMG) as worthy of attention. The company, in which I have a personal share holding, has this morning announced the formation of a joint venture, Genvax, to develop a novel DNA vaccine platform technology.

Human trials have been underway since 2001 in areas such as Lymphoma and Myeloma but the technology has broad applications in cancer, viral and bacterial infections (hence the term platform). The technology works on boosting the immune system by teaching it to identify hard to recognise cancer proteins as foreign and destroy them. Early results from the 25 patient trial in lymphoma are encouraging and evaluation of the result is expected by March 2005. Successful results should mean big pharmaceutical groups will start to take financial and commercial interests around that time.

This looks to be the first of a series of announcements due from Medical Marketing as it has a range of predominantly cancer trials moving into the clinical stage. (news flow could push the price higher)

The stock has made good progress in recent sessions up to the mid-80p level where the company is valued at just under 40 million. ENDS.

Please DYOR

cheers GF.

Still in and have no problems with the long term. Just holding and awaiting the Golden return.

Remember patience in most circunstances = big returns. Have you seen how many times Ive done it before.

cheers GF.

My hero.

I love you Dil, but remember Wales have no chance this year in the rugby Union. England easy.

cheers GF.

We didn't have a chance last year either :-)

nice to know you're still around GF, I've been fairly impressed over the last year with your picks, maybe you should start your own thread on your weekly or monthly suggestions / ideas on the stocks you like, just a thought (that would certainly help us amateurs)

Any opinions out there? MMG has been dropped from 175p since early September, but I am still holding.
cheers
swseun

Just dig in there freind. Evils still pushing his short and I suspect is responsible for a lot of the downside.

Best thing is to not give him any air time etc, etc.

Im just holding and awaiting in difficult times like this.

cheers GF.

thanks GF, just want to know I am the only one still holding it with a loss.

If it falls sub 100p Im in with a shed full..not that it will fall that low but you never know with this market.
Finns note suggests we wont have long to wait for the Genvax efficacy results out several months ahead of schedule.. great news.

Good to see you back mitzy,i wondered where you had got to.Early on in the year you were a frequent poster on this board and really seemed to have your finger on the pulse of this company,don`t leave it so long to post again.

swseun i`m holding at a loss after adding to my holding a couple of times during the big rise in sp earlier in the year.
I`m still very confident about MMG ,given that the Prudential have just added to their holding and the appointment of SAFC to manufacture batches of ruthenium cancer therapies.Given the recent turmoil in the markets and the recent placing of shares MMG`s share price is about where it was when i first bought in back in Febuary,not so bad really is it?

Roll on 2006
db66

great! so I'm not alone in the boat, thanks guys. :-) I might buy in more while the price gets more stable, as MMI is a great company with too good potential.

swseun

Cheers everyone Ill be buying more when they start to move forward again so it wont be long now.

From the other place. Looks like we're on the move.

jofster - 25 Oct'05 - 09:59 - 6507 of 6509


Stock prime for a bounce/rise.....Market flat to short, AGM next Wed, intensive note from Insinger due after AGM, Genvax data late Nov/early Dec and hopefully tie up before year end with big pharma.....big 6 to 8 weeks ahead for MMI. Theres more stuff due now than there was back in March and we saw how the price reacted then......

Medical Marketing Int'l Group PLC
27 October 2005


For Immediate Release 27 October 2005



MMI GRANTED FOURTH DNA VACCINE PATENT FOR GENVAX CANCER THERAPY

Medical Marketing International Group plc (MMI), the Cambridge, UK-based
pharmaceutical development company listed on the London Stock Exchange (AIM:MMG)
announces that it has received notification of allowance in Europe for a fourth
patent for its Genvax subsidiary developing DNA vaccines for cancer and
infection.

Mark Burton, Technical Manager at MMI explained 'We already have patents granted
in Europe, the USA and Australia for the 'Stevenson 1' family of patents.
Today's news is important as it is the first notification of allowance for the
'Stevenson 2' family of patents which protects our DNA vaccine technology from a
different angle.'

David Best, Chairman of MMI Group added 'This additional patent protection has
come at an opportune time. The potential for DNA vaccines in cancer has already
been shown by our previous clinical results. However, there is now recognition
that DNA vaccines also have great potential in infectious diseases such as
pandemic influenza as they can be rapidly developed and manufactured in response
to such threats. This ever strengthening patent portfolio enhances our vaccine
pipeline and similarly provides greater leverage to the current negotiations we
are having with major pharmaceutical companies.'

More good news. Lets Hope Best gets his finger out with the big boys.

cheers GF.

Are we talking George or David !!!

Both LOL.

cheers GF.

just get it from others:
Mike Walters report from the start of this month is available free to view:
http://www.michaelwalters.com/stories/news.phtml?num=2557

Opened out as it is free.....

A Global First
3/10/2005 (119264)

A Global First


Do not rely upon the preliminary results statement released by Medical Marketing International (MMG) on September 29. It contains a long report from executive chairman David Best, plus a detailed financial review, and much more. But it falls far short of conveying the real potential of this business.

The real impact of what is happening at MMI is in the annual report and accounts, a nicely produced document which goes to considerable lengths to seek to explain what is going on in the company, with particular emphasis on the three bio-babies, each of which has terrific potential.

Many of us hold our shares in nominee accounts, which means that we probably do not receive actual documents from the companies we back with our money. Such accounts have their uses, but are typical of the sloppy government and Stock Exchange thinking which has put in place a system which effectively divorces shareholders from their investments, depriving them of information, the chance to vote and speak at meetings, and much else.

In this instance, it is important that anyone who holds shares in MMI, or who might be thinking of buying some and you should - should make the effort to obtain a copy of the report and accounts. They should be available soon on the website at www.mmigroup.co.uk, but you can get a glossy copy via sites like www.ftannualreports.com.

You will simply have to take my word for what is in the report until you get it. But there are some remarkably confident comments. Perhaps the most eye-catching concerns Genvax, the companys 50% owned research project into DNA vaccines. It says Genvax has achieved a global first in DNA vaccines in a therapeutic clinical setting. (page 13)

Or maybe you might prefer a fragment from the smaller print a strong and targeted immune response against cancer has now been achieved. (page 13).

Or possibly Genvax is either working with, or is in discussions with, the major players in this field. (page 15)

Perhaps Several global leading pharmaceutical companies have recognised the importance of the Genvax breakthrough and discussions are ongoing. (page 15)

Maybe you would prefer We have shown that DNA vaccines can be made to work and this fact has been recognised by major pharmaceutical companies. (page 15)

Or what about progress with ruthenium in Oncosense, MMIs wholly-owned cancer therapy subsidiary? Try The data all indicates that ruthenium has the potential to be a blockbuster, or a series of blockbuster cancer therapies provided that this data is reproduced in the clinical trials. (page19)
Then there is the basic, wrap-around conclusion by Best I look forwardto seeing the full potential of MMI being realised as we stand poised on the edge of a new era for the company. (page 10)

Going through it, you might be tempted to conclude that this is a business which might be on the brink of creating several potential cures for cancer, and much else besides. That, you might think, could be extremely valuable. And you would be right.

There is much to digest in the long and detailed explanations of the various therapies on which the company is working, which is why you should read the report yourself. It has been produced not merely to help shareholders, but to introduce the business to a variety of audiences, and so sets out the complex progress of the science in a relatively simple way for most to follow.

At this point, it is important to point out that the information and comments in the report and accounts should be taken seriously. This is not some half-baked report put together with eyes closed, fingers crossed and a dash of good cheer after a good lunch.

It has had to withstand proper scrutiny by lawyers and accountants in an advisory team which demands proper legally-enforceable standards. MMI has just raised 10m by a share placing at 135p. That involved justifying every word, every line, way back to proving how and when the business was established, and producing the detailed research upon which every scientific conclusion was based. The directors who signed warranties are on the hook, liable to be sued for sums which amount to several times their salaries if they have not told the truth.

So when there is talk of a global first, or safer than , or promising results you can be sure there is proper evidence to justify such a statement.

When page three talks of an exciting portfolio of potential blockbusters, some of which are already showing promising clinical result and these have resulted in discussions with potential global marketing partners you can bet that chairman Best has been talking to the biggest names in the business.

Look around for those interested in vaccine development, and you will find people like GSK, Merck, Novartis/Chiron and Aventis. Please note, though, that the company has given no specific names and no deal has been concluded with any such people. It is possible that there will be no deal with anyone. But those are the sort of people who must be watching and some will be talking to MMI.

Both the DNA vaccines in Genvax and the ruthenium developments in Oncosense have attracted the main attention. My report Vaccine Action on September 2 spotlighted the growing interest from big pharma in vaccines.

The countless dire predictions of a bird flu pandemic have highlighted the importance of vaccines. If it happens, the world is likely to be left floundering. There are too few vaccines already made, too little world capacity to make more, and with each vaccine taking maybe nine months to create, the situation is not encouraging. It is 50 year-old technology, producing vaccines which might work half of the time.
That is why all of the big players are so interested in DNA vaccines. So far, most results have been disappointing. Until, that is, the global first achieved by Dr Freda Stevenson and the team at the University of Southampton. MMI owns half of this, rising to 58% over two years.

The way in which DNA vaccines work by injecting as protein found on the surface of tumours into the muscles of the patient is explained in the report. There is much about it in earlier reports in my archives.

Suffice it to say here that Professor Stevenson has achieved impressive results using tetanus toxin, which is strong enough to activate the human immune response system against cancer.

Trials in humans are being funded by cancer charities, and initial results were presented in March 2005. There are no toxic effects, and the side effects are mild flu-like symptoms which probably simply signify that the vaccine is working. None of the 25 patients suffering from follicular lymphoma in the initial trial have had to withdraw, and the vaccines have caused a significant and sustained elevation of immune factors, which in turn can be shown to have caused the cancer to remain in remission.

There are actually trials at three different centres. They involve many different factors and require an enormous amount of analysis. Not all results are in from all three centres. The tests are safe, and immune responses are good at low dosages. But dosages are being stepped up, and full efficacy results at higher dosages are not yet available.

The regulators link all trials, and have allowed two to go ahead in myeloma (cancer of the bone marrow). This involves treating healthy bone marrow donors. It is clear that progress is encouraging. Otherwise the regulator would not have allowed a second trial, or the involvement of healthy donors.

Lymphoma and myeloma both involve vaccines tailor-made to each patient. That creates some issues over manufacturing, but MMI believes these can be overcome.

A trial in men with prostate cancer has been under way since February 2005. It is progressing well, with no toxicity and low side effects. Crucially, it is possible to use an antigen common to most men, so we have pretty much a one size fits all solution, which does not require specific formulation for each patient.

There are relatively simple methods of measuring progress quickly. Medical ethics dictates that the company cannot publish results while further patients are still being recruited, but it appears that the tests are already being allowed to move to using a higher dosage. That would not be permitted if there were real problems.

Regulatory approval has been granted to start trials for colon cancer this month, again using an antigen which should be common to all sufferers. More trials for other solid tumours like lung and stomach cancer should start soon. Had there been any sign of problems thus far, the regulator would not have given permission.

In the annual report, MMI technical manager Mark Burton says that patents are being granted, and Genvax is working with or talking to, major players over the form of delivery mechanism which would allow the vaccines to be given to patients. And several global-leading pharmaceutical companies are in talks about the Genvax breakthrough.

As well as in tackling various forms of cancer, DNA vaccines also have applications in viral and bacterial infections. They are likely to be more effective with fewer side effects than traditional vaccines, and are cheaper and easier to make. Market potential is very significant and major pharmaceutical companies have recognised that Genvax has shown DNA vaccines can be made to work.

This is staggering stuff. It shows that, all being well, MMI could have block-buster products able to address multi-billion pound world markets. It is not there yet, but progress is encouraging.

At 138p, MMI is capitalised at 80m. Most of that is hope value hope that the current research will continue to succeed. Clearly it is impossible to rule out the chances of failure, but if all continues to go well, MMI could be worth many times the current value. And it is important to reflect that current Genvax trials are in human patients.

It is possible that Oncosense, the wholly-owned subsidiary developing ruthenium as a superior alternative to platinum in fighting cancer is worth even more than Genvax. Once again, it is important to recognise that there is many a slip, and ruthenium is not yet ready for market. It could all go wrong, but

Burton explains in the annual report that there are three different technologies aimed at the $40bn cancer therapy market. The potential drugs in development may be broadly compared to the market leading platinum based drugs cisplatin, carboplatin and oxaliplatin - in the mode of action and intended market. Laboratory data indicates that the ruthenium compounds have major advantages over platinum in terms of efficacy and safety along with lack of resistance and allergy.

Working with the team led by Professor Peter Sadler at the University of Edinburgh, the company has established a portfolio of some 8,000 compounds protected by a series of patents. Different compounds act against individual tumor types, raising the prospect of not one, but a while new class of cancer drugs.

There appears to be less resistance to ruthenium from some cancers, and fewer allergic reactions. Highly encouraging efficacy success with the lead ruthenium compound prompted the company to commission an independent test for certain toxicity. It appears that ruthenium is safer than tamoxifen, the leading breast cancer drug, which has been in use for decades.

Burton reports that the data all indicates ruthenium has the potential to be a blockbuster, or a series of blockbuster cancer therapies provided that this data is reproduced in the clinical trials.

Clinical trials are crucial, and a slightly sensitive issue. The company was promising to have ruthenium compounds in clinical trails before the end of this year. That is not likely to happen now. The target date is early next year.

It is important to understand this change of plan, which is what it is. It would have been possible to make small quantities of the lead compounds and to take them into clinical trials earlier this year. Instead it was decided to find a manufacturer who could make the compounds to the required standard on a commercial basis, and then to take them into the clinic.

This means that if the compounds are successful in the clinic, they could be marketed in the same form without the need for further development or re-testing. Inevitably, had small quantities passed clinical trials, a subsequent bigger production run would have had to be tested again so the current plan avoids duplication at the expense of some delay.

It also means that MMI can retain ownership of the manufacturing process, an important step in retaining more value. It has taken time to find a manufacturer not a big pharma name who can satisfy all of the MMI requirements, and who will ensure that there is no leakage of intellectual property or conflict of interest.

A decision on a manufacturer has been reached, and could be announced in the next few weeks.

Once all is signed, it should take 12 weeks to make two of the three lead compounds. A brief test period will follow, and the first two compounds could go into clinical trials early next year.

Ruthenium is related to platinum, and has many of the same characteristics. In some cases, it is 100 times more efficient. But because the general chemical qualities are already known, the possibility of unexpected problems is reduced though it still exists.

What next? Best remarks that the companys market value was 120m during the year, though it ha since fallen back. He believes there is a considerable way to go until the significant potential of the company is realised. Further clinical trials and licensing agreements should have an impact on this valuation.

He is not being rushed, nor is he a small company boss in pursuit of fast personal wealth. He and his wife, director Margaret Mitchell, still hold around 40% of the company. But in April 2004, they sold a chunk of the equity to M & G at 58p a share to realise 3.85m. The idea was not to cash in, but to bring in an important institutional shareholder. M & G (part of the Pru) had done plenty of homework and was excited by the prospects. M & G remains a large, supportive investor. That deal prompted me to recommend the shares at 67.5p (Best Bet, April 19, 2004).

Best has deliberately chosen no to rush ruthenium into the clinic, and instead consulted his bigger shareholders over how early he should conclude deals with big pharma.

He faced the classic small company dilemma. The earlier he went to a big company for backing, the greater the portion of future value that company would take. Yet holding on to advance the science and realise more value required extra cash.

In this case, Best and his advisers opted to go for final production quality on ruthenium, and keep full ownership of the product and the production method. That should eventually allow him to get a better deal from big pharma.

As official notifications come in probably this week it should become clear that the 10m fund-raising has attracted support from specialist bio-tech institutions. It appears that some would happily have subscribed for new shares at 175p, close to the price when talks started.

The way the City works can be cruel. MMI shares touched 300p briefly earlier this year, and were then hampered by a combination of short selling and an ill-informed note suggesting a ludicrously low value for the shares, written by an analyst who never took the trouble to talk with the company first. He later quietly corrected many of his errors.

That meant this latest funding has been done at a much lower price than might have been good news for the institutions who took the shares, but bad for small shareholders. The sheer burden of red tape time and cost stopped the company from offering the placing shares to all.

The price was reduced in the short term by the need to make insiders of all prospective buyers of the new shares. That meant all natural buyers were kept out of the market for three or four weeks. The price declined in the face of some rumoured short selling (never take such stories at face value), and the usual nasty nonsense where some institutions spread the word of a potential placing. Others sell short against the stock they might receive, thus making a quick profit and pushing down the price of the placing (and cost to them). Nasty, but all too predictable.

All of this is the trickier because MMI has modest revenues, and little in the way of a conventional asset backing. It has vast potential, but the current value can legitimately be debated and can be trashed by those either ignorant or setting out deliberately to mislead.

The success of the 10m placing with highly-informed investors at 135p makes a nonsense of the absurdly low analyst projection of value earlier in the year. Analyst Alex Isaac at Insinger de Beaufort has tentatively put a price of 275p on the shares.

That looks a modest target for those ready to gamble that the current progress- all properly authenticated in the report will continue. The report talks of discussions with potential global marketing partners, and Best mentions licensing agreements.

At this stage, he is unlikely to leap into bed with any of the pharma big boys. But he might be ready to contemplate licensing some of the technology for particular tasks perhaps applying it to a particular vaccine. That sort of thing might bring in an endorsement of sorts from a big name, plus extra cash.

The real game, though, is to hold on and to continue to develop the potential blockbusters for as long as possible. The further down the road to market, the greater the proof of efficacy, the greater the value MMI can retain. That does risk something going wrong, so you should never treat MMI shares as a sure thing but if progress continues as it has been going, then the numbers could eventually get very much bigger.

I hold shares in Medical Marketing.

Ends




Previous Stories


cheers Gf.

Thanks goldfinger,i have become attached to these for personal as well as financial reasons.
I just hope Evil doesn`t get some inside information and get the chance to close his short if these really do take off ,which i`m sure they will !!
db66