I don't like that suggestion, but it's not beyond the realms of possibility.
Undoubtedly, that suggestion will be rounded on as the company have previously set out a strong statement of confidence that they have all funds needed to execute the 201 trials. But this is AIM, where anything can happen and it's not at all unheard of for directors to suddenly significant revise statements re funding of major projects. And it need not be an issue of incompetence by the BoD but rather a curve-ball issue that has arisen in all the originally-unplanned elements that we are now committing to.
For my part, I don't buy this theory. I think that it is more likely we are clearing the way for some kind of deal that is being done.
Mr Big Not a chance that is the reason. They completed the deal early they did not terminate it.
Ethics has nothing to do with finances. Valirx wanted YA out of the way so the SP can rise without YA dragging it down. They know great news is on its way re 201 and very possibly we will see an update re 101. All is good and the trial started a couple of months ago and dosing will begin very soon. We will see a string of announcements outlining this.
There's a guy over on the iii board who reckons that VAL are in need of money to finance the trial and that the ethics committee need evidence of funding for the entire program before they will approve it. Could it be something like that?
Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look.
While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.