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.

Medical Marketing Int'l Group PLC
02 November 2005


Immediate Release 2 November 2005


MMI AGM UPDATE

At the Annual General Meeting of Medical Marketing International Group plc (AIM:
MMG), the Cambridge, UK-based pharmaceutical development company focussed on
cancer and infection, all resolutions were approved.

AGM Highlights:

Genvax

Approval to commence colon cancer clinical trial
Final lymphoma trial results expected December 2005
Myeloma and prostate cancer trials ongoing
DNA vaccine clinical trial for CMV (cytomegolovirus) ongoing
DNA vaccine for influenza in development
DNA vaccine for undisclosed bacterial infection in development.
DNA vaccines for pandemics - partner discussions ongoing

ncosense

SAFC pharma now manufacturing ruthenium for clinic
CXR Biosciences appointed to conduct final tests on GMP-grade ruthenium prior
to trials

Viratis

Further applications of ribozyme platform technology identified

David Best, Chairman of MMI Group commenting on these developments said:
'MMI now has a very strong and continuously progressing pipeline, strong patents
and the strongest balance sheet in its history. All these factors, coupled with
the discussions we are having with several major pharmaceutical companies means
that MMI is poised on the edge of a new and exciting era'.

For further information, please contact:

David Best - Chairman
MMI Group

Up 9% today, lets hope it continues, though don't expect any major announcements untill 06.

MS

Got this from the other side.

el magnifico - 4 Nov'05 - 18:26 - 6568 of 6575


In the Q&A after the AGM, Best noted that MMG was in discussions with "several major pharma" players (he specified that "several" meant more than three, but less than twelve), especially for the Genvax platform and associated anti-virals.

This was interesting, since in previous presentations Best has highlighted the maximum value creation of taking a product all the way through Phase II before partnering. So why talk to Pharma now ? His answer was that a surprising amount of discussions were initiated by the large pharmas knocking on MMG's door, rather than MMG seeking them out. He also suggested that "collaboration" at an earlier stage would be consistent with the model through Phase II, rather than any premature licensing deals which would surrender a good deal of the upside to the pharma name.

Also interesting was the "encouraging" progress of Genvax in the "universal" (as opposed to the "bespoke" ie patient-by-patient trials in lymphoma and myeloma) trial in prostate cancer trial, which commenced in Feb 2005. Here, results on active patients are "open-label" (ie results visible to the sponsors such as Cancer UK)and progressing to ever higher doseage levels, which suggests that the drug is well-tolerated. It was suggested that applications in colon, lung and stomach could soon be trial candidates, with the regulator already having approved a trial for colon cancer. This is not a narrow technology.

MMG has a patented DNA vaccine technology that works. This is revolutionary medicine. Add in ruthenium at Oncosense as a potential replacement for platinum-based cancer therapies and don't write off Viratis (which got a lot of play-time at the AGM for hepatitis as well as HIV)and you are effectively owning a portfolio of leading-edge compounds. MMG's business model, low-cost development of academic excellence) permits shareholders to participate in the tremendous upside.

After the AGM, there were no fireworks. Just as well. Fireworks are for the short term (and tomorrow night). Buy a postion in MMG and hold it.

el

This is a long document and a must read if you hold these. If you don't hold and still read the document how can you not afford to buy. The potential here is massive. I'm not ramping just read and make your own mind up. From the other side courtesy of Mike Walters.

049balt - 5 Nov'05 - 03:43 - 6574 of 6575



This was posted by Mike on the free section, on his site tonight.


The MMI Meeting

This is mostly an edited version of the presentation by MMI chairman David Best at the agm. It seems fair to make it available to all shareholders. If you reproduce it, or part of it, please attribute it to www.michaelwalters.com. It does not include comments on the statement posted on www.michaelwalters on Friday.

Are you worried about Medical Marketing International (MMG)? Do you wonder why I write so much about it?

Perhaps this will help any doubters to understand. It is not my work, merely a fairly lightly edited version of the presentation by chairman David Best at the annual meeting on November 2. Remember - any such statement from Best has to be verified by all sorts of advisers before he makes it. We are not talking top-of-the-head gossip here.

As suggested, he came up with no startling new announcement. That was always unlikely. But because a few had hoped there would be something, they have tossed out a few shares and the price has slipped a few pence since.

There can never be any guarantees with a company pushing at the frontiers of science like MMI, but the sceptics have completely misjudged the risk/reward balance here. If MMI gets just one of the present portfolio working, the potential is massive. Given the likely news flow as trials come along over the next 12 months, the downside is modest.

There might, too, be a pleasant and highly significant surprise on the upside if some of the possibilities relating to avian flu and DNA vaccines come good.

I may comment in more detail in the next few days. But David Best's presenetation - read the final sections especially carefully - says most of it. I have not reproduced the slides. But if you are interested in MMI - and the fight against cancer - you will want to read this long report in full. I hold shares in MMG.

Chairmans Report

Let me briefly explain the MMI business model: We do no raw
research ourselves, instead, we identify and acquire, from leading academic
organisations, world class technologies that have the potential to satisfy unmet needs in major therapeutic markets. We then manage the preclinical and early clinical developments and patent prosecution before licensing on to major pharmaceutical marketing partners. Our main focus is cancer and infection where there is massive unmet need. More details are in our annual report. Copies are available electronically from our website (www.mmigroup.co.uk) and from the free annual report services accessed from the London Stock Exchange web site on the Financial Times.

Cancer is now the most common form of death in the developed world. One in three
will get cancer and one in four will die of it. In the UK, over 270,000 people get cancer each year, and 155,000 die of it.

Its not all gloom and doom though as these charts show: Although breast cancer is
the single most common form of cancer, medical advances in recent years have
improved survival rates to around 80%. Prostate cancer is also very common,
affecting around 85% of men by the age of 85, most men will die with prostate cancer not of it.

Sadly this is not the case for some other cancers, especially lung cancer which
remains the single biggest killer and where survival rates have not improved. Colon cancer is also very common and there is still a need for better medicines. About two thirds of all cancer deaths are caused by lung; colon; prostate; oesophageal; pancreas;stomach; lymphoma; ovarian; myeloma; and melanoma; along with those cancers often caused by viral infection, that is, liver and cervical. These are the cancers that MMIs pipeline addresses.


Viral infection is also a major problem. HIV now infects around 40 million people. Over half of these are in Sub-Saharan Africa, with around 10 million in the developed world. Some estimate that the number will double
in the next ten years. AIDS is a medical and humanitarian disaster but the hepatitis problem is many times bigger. There are over two billion people infected with hepatitis worldwide.

Pandemics such as influenza, SARS and bird flu are in the headlines too.
As well as viral infections such as AIDS and hepatitis, bacterial infections have not gone away. The emergence of antibiotic-resistant strains such as MRSA, and TB is well documented.

These are the viruses and bacteria that MMIs pipeline is focused on. So lets look at that pipeline and see how we have added to it during the last year:
In Genvax, we licensed in, on a worldwide exclusive basis, what Cancer Research UK and the Leukaemia Research Fund described as their Flagship technology.
Cancer charities are continuing to fund several clinical trials with the Genvax DNA vaccine technologies and we are working in collaboration with scientists at
Southampton University to develop these.

Our Oncosense subsidiary exercised an option over further promising ruthenium
compounds which emerged from our collaboration with Edinburgh University, we
further extended that collaboration and in addition, Dr James Hoeschele, the inventor of Carboplatin, the market leading cancer drug, joined our team in Edinburgh to carry out highly specialised radio- labelling work.

Viratis, our anti- viral subsidiary, extended its agreement with Kings and Queen Mary colleges in London to add a hepatitis ribozyme to the existing HIV/AIDS one. Viratis also licensed an immune sponge technology from the same colleges. This has applications in rheumatoid arthritis, asthma and other immune disorders. A further collaboration with Kings College, to develop delivery mechanisms, is underway. The supply side of MMIs business model is working well.

During the past year, Genvax achieved nothing less than a global first. Immunology is a highly complex subject, but in the simplest of terms, Genvax DNA vaccines used in sick patients were able to stimulate a powerful response in both parts of the immune system, the antibody response and the cellular response. There are several cancer therapies in development that stimulate an antibody response, however, creating a significant and sustained stimulation of the heavy guns of the immune system, the cytotoxic T lymphocytes or CTLs, had proved elusive, until now!

Similarly, other DNA vaccines in development often cause an initial boost to the
immune system, but the effects of repeated vaccination have been disappointing. Not with the Genvax vaccines. This is a highly complex subject. If shareholders want to discuss this after todays meeting, please telephone or e-mail your queries. We would be delighted to explain.

Preliminary results for a trial in patients with lymphoma were reported to the Second International Conference on DNA Vaccines in March this year. A two-pronged trial in bone marrow cancer, or myeloma, continued to be promising and the first nonbespoke vaccine trial, this time for prostate cancer began in February.

Three major patents for the Genvax technology also granted during the year. Patents in DNA vaccines are almost as confusing as immunology itself. Not surprisingly, some commentators did get confused.

To avoid any more confusion, this is what one of the US granted patents for DNA
vaccines looks like. Here is the original document, potentially worth more than its weight in gold.

Now the science bit. On the left, we see the Genvax DNA vaccine cassette for cancer. This is the appropriate cancer antigen fused to a fragment of tetanus toxin. When the patient receives the vaccine, the immune system thinks it is dealing with tetanus, one of the most powerful immunostimulants. This causes the patients immune system to mount a massive immune response, both antibody and CTLs, and these deal with the cancer. Bespoke Genvax DNA vaccines are appropriate for cancers such as lymphoma and myeloma. Universal Genvax DNA vaccines are suitable for epithelial cancers such as prostate, colon, lung, and stomach.

The Genvax vaccines can, and have been, constructed to deal with viral and bacterial infections too. The market potential for this Genvax platform technology therefore covers not only cancer but viral and bacterial infection too. Now with clinical proof-of-concept, the Genvax vaccines have very significant potential.

It is not ethically acceptable to report on an ongoing clinical trial as that might bias the results. What we can say to-date is as follows:
In a multi-centre, UK, open label, dose escalating trial of 25 patients with lymphoma, which began in 2001 and ended in 2004, there were no toxic effects reported. There were only mild side effects with no patient having to be withdrawn from the trial. The majority of the patients gave an immunological response to the vaccine.

We can confirm this by using a sophisticated technique that measures the levels of various immune factors and blood cells in blood samples taken before and after each course of vaccinations. This work is very time consuming and so far, only some of the samples taken from the Southampton patients have had this detailed analysis, and it was these results that were reported earlier this year. The results clearly show that the Genvax DNA vaccines were indeed causing a powerful and sustained immune response in both parts of the immune system. The remaining blood samples should be analysed by the end of the year and the overall results will then be released.

As the myeloma and prostate cancer trials are ongoing, we cannot comment other than to say that they are progressing and patients continue to be recruited at escalating dose levels. It is reasonable to assume from this that there have been no serious negative events and that the trials are progressing well. It is also important to note that the prostate cancer vaccine is a universal vaccine not a bespoke one like the lymphoma and myeloma ones. Regulatory approval for the colon cancer vaccine trial has now been given and recruitment has begun.

The criteria for this trial mean that patients may not only be given the vaccine following both surgery and chemotherapy, they may also be given it immediately after surgery alone. Other trials are due to begin soon.

There are three groups of potential therapies in our Oncosense subsidiary, ones based on the precious metal ruthenium, on pineapple proteases and the enzyme
endosialidase, which may be helpful in preventing secondary tumours. There is only time to talk about ruthenium today.

Ruthenium is a precious metal similar to platinum. We attach various side chains
known as arene rings, along with other side chains or ligands. The various
combinations of all these give us around 8,000 compounds protected by granted
patents. Here are a few early compounds, but these are not the ones heading for the clinic.

We have shown in laboratory tests that our ruthenium compounds are much more
effective than the market leading drugs based on platinum. Independent tests have also shown that they are not only less toxic than the platinum drugs but remarkably, even safer than tamoxifen, a well known drug for breast cancer, which is so safe, it can even be given to prevent breast cancer.

We have also shown that different ruthenium compounds have different activities
against different tumours, raising the prospect that we have not one, but a whole new class of cancer drugs.

Patents have now granted in the biggest markets and we have now selected three lead candidates that will go forward to clinical trials. If the clinical trials results are in line with the laboratory ones, then we have a blockbuster or series of blockbuster drugs.

The ruthenium inventor, Professor Peter Sadler from Edinburgh, has been elected to the Royal Society in recognition of his work.

This slide shows how ruthenium compares to the market- leading platinum based
drugs: Ruthenium appears to be active against a broader range of cancers than is seen with platinum ones. There are 3 platinum drugs available and we have some 8,000 ruthenium compounds covered by the patents, we have synthesised over 100, and selected around 15 compounds of particular interest.

Several cancers are resistant to platinum, but those same tumours are not resistant to ruthenium. Platinum drugs, especially cisplatin, are highly toxic. In independent laboratory tests we have been unable to show liver toxicities at likely therapeutic dosages. (MW note - this suggests a high degree of safety - tests have not revealed any damage at likely dosage levels).

Patents on the platinum drugs have mostly expired so these are now generic drugs
whereas patents on ruthenium have only just granted.Although the platinum drugs are widely used because they are effective, in most cases, the ruthenium equivalents are more, or much more effective.

Platinum once injected rapidly binds to blood; therefore less free drug is available to do its job. The ruthenium compounds tested so far are only slightly bound to blood so more free drug is available.

Around 10-15% of patients are allergic to platinum and have to be taken off it. Those manufacturing platinum can also become sensitised to it. Although ruthenium is used in industry, there are no reports of sensitisation.

Even though the platinum drugs have been available for many years, their mode of
action is still not fully understood. Professor Sadler and our team have learned a lot about how ruthenium works and therefore we can design ruthenium compounds more effectively.

Obviously the platinum drugs gained regulatory approval many years ago. The
regulatory pathway for ruthenium is equally clear so we know exactly what we have to do to get approval. The potential for rapid approval means that we have a long product lifecycle of a patented drug.

So far, ruthenium appears to be potentially better than platinum on every count. If we get the same results in the clinical trials then it is likely that ruthenium will become a major new class of cancer drugs with multi billion $ potential.

This slide shows the results of the industry-standard efficacy test for cancer drugs know as the IC50. This simply means how much drug is needed to kill half the human cancer cells growing in a laboratory dish under carefully controlled conditions.

We buy in human cancer cell lines from the European Reference Library. These are
grown up in our Cambridge tissue culture laboratory and then treated with either one of the three platinum drugs or one of our ruthenium ones. The amount needed to kill half the cells is recorded, the lower the number, the more effective the drug.

A figure of 100 means that the drug does not effectively kill that cancer cell- line. So, in column one, Carboplatin is not effective against colon cancer. The most effective platinum drug against colon cancer is cisplatin, but our ruthenium one is nearly 5 times more effective. Ruthenium gives better results in all the major cancer types. In lung cancer, ruthenium is nearly 14 times more effective than cisplatin. It must be noted hear that cisplatin is highly toxic so carboplatin may be used. If that is the case, ruthenium is nearly 100 times more effective in lung cancer. You will recall that lung cancer is the biggest killer of all, and all the cancers shown in this chart are difficult to treat, and yet ruthenium is more effective on every one.

Viruses like AIDS enter a human cell by attaching themselves to two receptors that are formed as a result of various chemical messages known as RNA. The Viratis ribozyme is an enzyme that destroys the RNA message that is responsible for creating the receptors. No receptors, no virus gets in the cell.

How does the Viratis ribozyme compare with the standard treatment for AIDS known
as HAART or Triple Therapy, and how does it compare to the newer drugs that also
try to block the entry of the AIDS virus into the human cell?

Laboratory data shows that our ribozyme is effective and the design of it suggests that toxicity is unlikely. As the ribozyme prevents the virus from entering the cell, the virus is unable to replicate and therefore resistance too is unlikely.

HAART patents are coming toward their end of their life, whereas the Viratis ones have only granted recently. We know that HAART and the newer drugs are unpleasant, so patients often give up. Obviously we have no clinical data yet.
HAART targets many sites on the virus and this may be why the side effects are
unpleasant. The Viratis ribozyme is specific to the two receptors that are necessary for cellular entry.

Most biological drugs need a delivery mechanism and we are working on several
developments here. Although Viratis is at an earlier stage than either the Genvax vaccines or ruthenium, the market potential is clearly significant.

We now know the ribozyme technology will also apply to hepatitis B.
During the year we added the immune sponge technologies, which, although at an
early stage, appear to have potential in treating diseases like rheumatoid arthritis and asthma. Further Viratis patents were also granted during the year.

Despite all that activity, we kept tight control on costs and also maintained income from our service activities. Overall, we ended the year with no bank borrowings and a 49% increase in cash.

MMIs objective is to add shareholder value through drug development. We did a lot of drug development during the year and the growth in the value of the Company reflected that.


Last year I said that we had an exciting year ahead, and so it was. Lots more
happened. We believe that the coming year will be even more exciting and we have some very ambitious plans.

With those plans in mind, in early September we discussed the strategic options with our major institutional shareholders. They were, like us, unanimously of the view that it would be in the best interests of shareholders to raise funds to take our products higher up the value curve rather than licensing them to pharmaceutical companies now.

All our existing institutional shareholders at least maintained their percentage
shareholding and several significantly increased their stakes. Major new institutional shareholders supported the placing, which at 10 million, is more than MMI hasraised in its entire history and is sufficient to carry out our ambitious plans.

The 10 million will be used mainly to expedite the current Genvax trials results analysis, and expand the trials programme. Additional staff has already been recruited to work in the Genvax team at Southampton. The funds will also be used to develop the commercial manufacturing process, including the one for the bespoke vaccines.

We have already entered into an agreement with Sigma-Aldrich who are now three
weeks into a 12 week programme to manufacture commercial grade ruthenium for
clinical trials. This is being done in their state-of-the-art, FDA approved facility in Maddison, Wisconsin, USA. Under this agreement, we maintain ownership of everything and this is extremely useful in negotiations with pharmaceutical marketing partners. It also means that shareholders continue to own the full potential of ruthenium.

As soon as we have manufactured products, we will complete the final safety tests and begin clinical trials.

The funds will also be used to develop and test delivery mechanisms for our Viratis anti-viral ribozymes.

Its useful having the strongest balance sheet in our entire history at this stage of our discussions with major pharmaceutical companies, and it is also useful having a little spare just in case one of the several new technologies we are evaluating appears to be another potential blockbuster.


This (MW note. slide not reproduced here) update of the clinical status of our therapeutic pipeline shows a few surprises!

The first Genvax anti- viral DNA vaccine for the CMV virus is already in the clinic. This is part of the myeloma trial where the objective is to prevent the bone marrows from healthy volunteers becoming infected with this virus that can be fatal to the bone marrow recipient whose immune system is at that time, ineffective.

There is already some preclinical data on a DNA vaccine for influenza and some
preclinical data on a DNA vaccine for a serious bacterial infection that we cannot identify for commercial reasons.

The MMI therapeutic pipeline, especially for cancer, is now as good as those of some major pharmaceutical companies.

The final part of the MMI business model is to gain the endorsement of global
pharmaceutical marketing partners. They are only interested in products with
competitive profiles and blockbuster potential. They need to see convincing clinical data and also require granted patents in major territories.

We are currently in discussions with several of the worlds biggest pharmaceutical companies who recognise the potential within our pipeline. Obviously, as Genvax DNA vaccines are the most advanced of our products, with five clinical trials ongoing, then this is the main focus of these discussions. A number of those companies have acknowledged that Professor Stevensons work is of global significance. A number of discussions are on a much broader front than Genvax alone.

In Viratis, we believe it will be possible to extend the ribozyme technology to a number of additional viral infections beyond the current AIDS and hepatitis B ones. This may be another platform technology.

Following the recent appointment of Sigma-Aldrich who are right now manufacturing the first 3 ruthenium compounds for clinical trials, I can also confirm that we have now appointed CXR Biosciences to carry out some of the final preclinical tests on these products enabling them to go forward into clinical trials.

Lastly, given all the recent publicity about pandemics, we are in discussions with a number of parties concerning the possibility of using the clinically-proven Genvax DNA vaccine technology to overcome the manufacturing issues with conventional vaccines for certain infectious diseases.

If the results of the Genvax clinical trials continue to be successful;

If just one of the 8,000 ruthenium compounds is as effective and safe in the clinic as it is in the lab;

If just one of the Viratis ribozyme platform is successful;

Then we will make a real difference to patients with cancer or infectious diseases. If any one of these milestones is achieved, if we reach agreement with just one of the global pharmaceutical companies that we are in discussions with; Then it will transform your company.
Thank you.

cheers MS,
time for me to top up with some more of these, very exciting year ahead me thinks.

Too true, very exciting. Not only for us but the poor suffers of this dreadful illness.
The wife of a pal of mine has just been diagnosed and unfortunately it's not looking good. But in the future it could be a thing of the past, let's hope so.

LOL

MS

Well, I don't know of any family that hasn't been affected at one stage or other by the big C, hopefully MMGs efforts won't go unrewarded

Made a profit on this a while back and like to keep an eye on how things are progressing.

Curious end of day today -

16:25:30 138p 138p 145p 500 690 SELL O
16:25:24 138p 138p 145p 1,250 1,725 SELL O
16:24:38 138p 138p 145p 1,267 1,748 SELL O
16:23:07 140p 140p 145p 5,000 7,000 SELL O
16:20:23 142.78p 142p 148p 2,000 2,856 SELL O
16:19:59 147p 142p 148p 25,000 36,750 BUY T
16:19:33 145p 144p 148p 5,000 7,250 SELL O
16:16:27 146p 146p 152p 10,000 14,600 SELL O
15:52:16 146p 146p 152p 25,000 36,500 SELL O

Up ... and then a plummet at the end (~6 minutes) - am I missing something? Is this simply MM manipulation?

Apologies if I'm simply being a bit stupid (!) but this strikes me a slightly odd.

Stuart

My thoughts exactly Stuart,a rather interesting day with regards trades.
100,000 shares bought at 16.59
10,000 Broker buy at 17.07
Add to that the 100,000 unknown which looks like a buy ,the MM trade and Friday afternoons 100,000 buy and you can see things are starting to hot up .
Surely this must open higher tomorrow with those late buys going through.
DB66

Barstow predicts biotech bull market

Published: 12:11 Thursday 10 November 2005

The next bull market will be in biotech stocks but the tobacco sector has never looked worse, argues James Barstow, highly-respected manager of the Aurora investment trust.

Speaking at a meeting hosted by Arbuthnot Securities, Barstow, who owns positions in patent company BTG (BGC), Medical Marketing International (MMG) and GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), said: 'The next bull market will be in pharmaceuticals and biotech stocks.

'In the US, companies such as Amgen are starting to make big profits. Medical Marketing could be a massive performer if there's an increased risk of a pandemic. It has a DNA vaccine it could roll out within five weeks I couldn't get out of them whether they'd had a call from the government or not.'

However, Barstow, who runs a concentrated portfolio of just 33 stocks in his 40 million trust (ARR), is very negative on tobacco stocks.

'The prospects have never looked worse and the price/earnings ratios have never been higher,' he said.

cheers GF.

Immediate Release 10 November 2005

MEDICAL MARKETING INTERNATIONAL

- Notification of Major Interests in Shares -

Medical Marketing International Group plc ("MMI or the Company"), (AIM:MMG)
received notification on 9 November 2005 that Universities Superannuation Scheme
Limited, UK Smaller Companies ("USS") had recently purchased 110,000 ordinary
shares in the Company. These recently purchased shares when added to the 635,367
new shares bought by USS in the recent MMI share placing, together with the USS
existing holdings in MMI, means that USS now has a notifiable interest in
4,685,367 ordinary shares of 0.2p in the Company.

As a result of this transaction, USS, has a notifiable interest in 8.04% of the
Company's current ordinary issued share capital. These shares are registered
under the name of Chase Nominees Limited (USS).

Exercise of Options

The Company also announces that, it today issued and allotted 10,000 new
ordinary shares of 0.2 pence each in the Company following an exercise of share
options at an exercise price of 31.5 pence per share.

These shares will rank pari passu with all existing ordinary shares. Application
has been made for admission of the new ordinary shares to trading on AIM and
dealings are expected to commence on 16th November 2005.

The number of ordinary shares in issue following admission of these shares will
be 58,264,171.

ENDS

A very positive piece you posted Goldfinger ,SP moving up a bit today .
Lets hope we can break through that 1.50 barrier today
DB66

Does look very positive DB, Im hoping to see Evil out pretty soon.

cheers GF.

GF

If he doesn't get out soon I think he'll get his fingers burnt big time. Anyone who shorts this is taking a big gamble. One bit of good news and it will fly, it's a high beta stock.

LOL

MS

Sure is mickey. Hes not out of them today though.

cheers GF.

From ADVFN worth a read ,even if you don`t agree with it.

moneym4ker - 24 Nov'05 - 09:31 - 6657 of 6660


There is currently a vaccum concerning the right valuation of MMI as the
house broker doesn't give these figures.
> There are only two meaningful methods of valuing a company like MMI, by
calculating the NPV or by comparison with peers. The NPV route is complex
and involves a lot of industry knowledge. The only broker to do an NPV on
MMI recently was Insinger. Here, Alex Isaac worked out an NPV prior to our
announcements about colon cancer, flu' and bacterial infections. Her
calculations gave her a price of 275p per share, which, with approximately
58 million shares in issue gives a market capitalisation of ?160 million.
This is still a bit low in comparison to our peers, and we have now added to
the clinical portfolio. The NPV takes into account the market size, the risk
and the likely deals with big pharma. NPV's generally assume a 95% risk with
pre-clinical products and a 35% risk at phase II. One of the chaps on your
bulletin board was a bit off target when he assumed a royalty rate from us
to the universities of 50%. The real figure is less than a 10th of that,
don't forget, we are funding all the development. The figures are of course
sensitive and confidential, however, I can tell you that typically we pay
very little up front other than paying patent costs. We fund the development
(although the charities are continuing to fund the current Genvax trials)
then we pay the originator a milestone payment, typically at the beginning
of phase III, at first market approval and then royalties on sales. The
milestones start in the tens of ?thousands, and rise to the hundreds of
?thousands when we actually have market approval. Royalties are usually at
the lower end of single figures.
> Assuming that we will license on to a major marketing partner, we would
expect a signature fee, collaborations fees, milestone fees and royalties
that add up to or exceed the packages outlined in the next paragraph.
Royalties can range from single figures to as high as 50%. The better the
product and the more competition to market it, the higher the figure.
Obviously I cannot reveal our target here, but we obviously believe that we
have some special products, and the number of discussions tends to endorse
this.
> On those calculations, it might be worth looking back at the size of deals
that have been done in the past few years. The Bristol Myers-Imclone deal
was worth a total of $2 BILLION for Erbitrux, a single anti-cancer, then I
understand, at phase III. Antisoma did a $500 million deal with Roche for a
product at phase II and there have been several others worth around $600
million at that stage. Merck did a single product deal a few weeks ago for a
product in phase I and the package was worth $199 million. Astra Zeneca paid
$100 million two years ago for an anti-cancer product not yet in the clinic.
> The problem we have is that there is no recent precedent for two whole
portfolios of potential blockbusters, the Genvax vaccines and ruthenium.
> Comments about MMI's share price not moving until we are profitable is
unlikely. What seems to move the share price is clinical data, patents
granting and, we assume, deals with big pharma would give us the endorsement
that would be recognised by the markets.
> A peer group analysis is equally difficult. There are companies out there
at a similar stage of development but we can't find any that have as large a
portfolio or one that has such market potential. The nearest we can find are
a few companies in the USA which have market caps of around $ 1 billion. USA
companies are valued much more highly than UK ones and they tend to have
more cash on their balance sheets. Adjusting for these,and for currency, it
would be easy to justify a market cap of ?400 million, which gives a share
price of around 690p.
> Another way of arriving at a peer comparison is to find a company with as
large a pipeline at a similar stage, and as these are all major
pharmaceutical companies, take out the effect of current sales (as we hardly
have any). Please do not quote this bit, but we have tw> ice as many
anti-cancer drugs in the clinic as Astra-Zeneca does. This part of their
portfolio alone is said by analysts to contribute ?500 million to AZ's
overall value.
> We have seen speculation about MMI being the next Microsoft or Vodafone.
Although this sort of speculation might be counter-productive, it is worth
remembering that most major drug companies became big on the back of one
blockbuster. Glaxo with Zantac, SmithKline Beecham with Tagamet, both
revolutionary drugs in their day as they cured ulcers rather than requiring
surgery. It is perfectly possible that this happens to MMI, but speculation
invites comparisons with British Biotech and we don't want to go there!!
> We are meeting with a number of other analysts and hopefully some more
will be interested in writing about MMI and perhaps giving a view on
valuation.
> Lastly, again, not to be reported yet, but we are hoping to get Buchanan's
to host our AGM slides and words on their server giving shareholders easy
access to it whilst we are redesigning our web site and replacing the IT
system.
> A few more comments about speculation on another BB:
> The ruthenium compounds are NOT all the same. Each one shows a different
range of activities. You may recall that we have mentioned this lots and
even produced a slide on it. Each ruthenium compound targets a specific
cancer type, this is probably why they appear to be so much better than the
platinum drugs. It would be very unlikely that we would progress all 8000
compounds to the clinic, but even in the first generation there are at least
15 compounds that are very good. Obviously, we are working on the second
generation already. The Genvax vaccines too are all different, there are
currently two bespoke ones for lymphoma and myeloma, two non-bespoke ones
for prostate and colon, with ones for lung and stomach in the pipeline.
There are also three non-bespoke ones for infection: CMV, and flu' are for
viruses and there is so far one for a serious bacterial infection.
> It is quite rare to come up with a whole new way of treating a range of
diseases so, once again, there are no easy-to-find peer comparisons. If you
go back about 60 years, you could perhaps equate this to the penicillin's or
tetracycline antibiotics, or perhaps the beta-blockers for hypertension or
the benzodiazepines for anxiety in the 60's. All of these breakthroughs were
however shared a by several companies.
> On the takeover front, shareholders should remember that the major
shareholders, myself, Margaret, the Pru, USS etc think that the company is
potentially worth several billion. None of us need any money now and between
myself, Margaret the Pru and USS, we own around 57% of the company so a
hostile bid is unlikely to succeed unless it was worth onehellofalot! What
could happen is a big company takes a minority stake with an option to buy
us out a later date. This is what has just happened with Chiron and
Novartis. Even that sort of deal would have to be worth a lot up-front
because getting into bed with one big company would rule out any deals with
their rivals. We are not talking about a mere premium to the share price
here.
> I hope all this helps the shareholders understand where we are. These are
merely background notes and not our inermost strategic thoughts so I have no
problem with you introducing these thoughts into the debate

DB66

Interesting read DB, looks rather like a Mike Walters piece.

cheers GF.

Hi Goldfinger, its good to see a few buys starting to go through today after a period of a week or so of mostly sells.
DB66

goldginger, i do not believe it is from Mike Walters.

Confirm it is not Walters - it is posted on his sites discusion forum, but the source was the same - moneym4ker - 24 Nov'05 - 09:31 - 6657 of 6660 on ADVFN. The implication is that it is David Best but I have no idea of its authenticity.