Thanks for the mention @McLovin

I've been following this company for the last few years and I agree that financially the results are strong. However, I believe the current share price weakness may be related to repeated delays in terms of the trials of Afamelonitide in other areas, namely Vitiligo. Although they did just announce they have been recruiting for a phase 3 trial with hopes of FDA approval by 2026. I think this timeline was once upon a time around 2024-2025.

Moreover their recent foray into the consumer cosmetics industry has been extremely slow and quite disappointing. Their first product Cyacelle was launched earlier this year and so far there has been very limited marketing. The total number of bottles sold was 70 at the 1H results.

I think recent board movement has also been weighing down on the share price. The outgoing chairman hasn't got the cleanest history however he has just been replaced.

There is another forum that purely discusses CUV as a company which I won't link here. If you do a quick search you should be able to find it. That forum has members who have been following the company for much longer than I have although being a free forum just take it with a grain of salt what information you read there.

Disc: Held IRL and on Strawman.

Wow really appreciate the insight here @BoredSaint . You've mentioned a number of things that I didn't quite pick up on yet. I was scratching my head wondering how can a cash machine like CUV constantly have their share price stagnate and lag, but it now makes sense. I've got them on my watch list, but I'm a bit too gun shy to invest at this stage.

I'll be digging a bit deeper into their foray into consumer cosmetics to learn a bit more here as well.

Thanks once again.

CUV is an interesting business for sure.

They are uninvestable for me due to management.

They have the most eccentric management I have ever come across in a listed business.

There is a fair bit of information you can search for on this - The AFR covered it well in the past.

The place to look is at the CEO & Chair, their relationship and the remuneration report.

I wouldn't be surprised if the internal replacement of the current CEO ends up being the current CEO...

Ditto @BoredSaint @Slomo

Management Concerns: I’ve been observing CUV for over six years. While the metrics are promising, I’ve always had reservations about the management. There were numerous issues that niggled me, renumeration, communication and attitude. For example, Phillip W sent out long updates focusing on global issues, far removed from their core business.

Transition to Skincare: I had a stake in the company, but I sold it when they ventured into the over-the-counter skincare range. I was sceptical about their understanding of the market they were entering. With a retail offering, having a good product isn’t enough; they needed to develop a brand that customers could recognise and trust and navigate a completely different distribution/marketing landscape. To me, this seemed too far removed from their core identity as a pharmaceutical company.

My stance on CUV is heavily influenced by my perception of the management and the board. Perhaps I’m weighing it too heavily. However, I’ve learned over the years that if something doesn’t feel/look right, I’m better off elsewhere.

Credit Where It’s Due: To CUV’s credit, they’ve accomplished something many Australian biotech’s never do: they’ve developed a product, established manufacturing and distribution, turned a profit and last time I looked had loads of cash. 

Gone through a few broker reports today after reading some interesting comments here.

I see everyone seeing management as being the main negative. However I give credit for management for changing their stance with the buyback and also building up the business and supply chain manufacturing from the orphan drug Afamelonitide for the treatment of a rare disease which is really hard to do.

So the positives are:

* They have Scenesse (Afamelonitide) which is an orphan drug of rare disease. Gives them pricing power

* Scenesse appears to have hardly any competition with Mitsubishi Pharma being the closest delaying trials again.. Must be hard recruiting when sufferers number less than 100K around the world.

* Cashflow positive and profitable

* UK market if they win the appeal. But seems unlikely

* Maybe management is shifting in attitude with the recently announced buyback.

But from this I see a few negatives

* Execution of strategy is not very clear and maybe this is where everyone cites issues with management. Trying to find new applications for Scenesse is one example (Stroke, Vitiligo etc) but not finding much traction and doesn't make much sense to me. Be better to develop the other drugs they have in their pipeline or make an acquisition with their cash that fits in with the company vision of skin health.

* Perhaps Scenesse is priced too high so there is the threat of health and regulatory authorities intervening here.

* Vitiligo trials have raised a few questions with not many updates on progress. Recruitment also seems to be falling behind.

* Still mainly a one product company with Scenesse for treatment of EPP. And number of patients is small.

* Revenue a bit cyclical as Scenesse is used more in warmer than colder/darker months.

Most importantly, I still think this is a good target of short sellers. I saw the trading today and it was just shocking at the price moves from just a few shares. No wonder this is one of the recommended shorts on the ASX. This may be from the past when Clinuvel management tried to fight against the hedge funds shorting the stock and spending their energy doing a witchhunt instead of running their business.

Maybe the buyback will hopefully fix the stock manipulation but I highlight the word "hopefully".

I see why people say this is one of the cheapest biotech stocks compared to say Telix, or I dare say that forbidden name, Clarity Pharmaceuticals. But I now understand the reason for this.

I now hold as I got caught by the weird trading today and forgot to update my order - it was fortunately at the low end of the range for the day.

Another interesting link I found from Bioshares

Personally I'm not overly concerned about a competitor. From memory at the Strawman meeting with the MD last year he mentioned that the patent CUV held was with the delivery system of the product. And he spoke about how an injectable use has its benefits over any competitors with an oral drug (more controlled dosing, better route of entry into the body).

I think the reach that CUV current has to the overall EPP affected population is still quite small. There are still some jurisdictions in which Scenesse is not approved or there hasn't been an agreement into the pricing model (looking mostly at the UK issue). So in terms of growth of Scenesse as a drug for purely EPP, there should still be some room to grow.

In terms of future development, ongoing studies on Vitiligo and DNA repair are yielding some positive results although this is still early stage. The annual report did mention that in the short term they are focusing on their new porfolio of melanocortins and also their cosmetic products. They also mentioned they are looking into an acquisition to complement their current business. Not entirely sure what type of business they are looking into but hopefully it will generate future cash.