The latest Investing Matters Podcast with Jean Roche, Co-Manager of Schroder UK Mid Cap Investment Trust has just been released. Listen here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
this week Friday! finally we are getting close to the FDA decision.
I still believe this will come good as FDA did not outright rejected it. They are aware of the trial design for phase 3 and MTFB did a rolling submission for NDA so FDA has all the data they need and just need to know the strategy about addressing liver impact in a face to face meeting. Hopefully independent liver experts would be able to alleviate all the concerns from FDA.
MTFB is confident as well and appointed a new director just a week before FDA meeting. Hopefully there should not be any further surprises from FDA! Meeting minutes could arrive before AGM?
This is the opportunity for MTFB as well to ask FDA on how they are allowing Vancomycin to be prescribed when it has adverse effects on kidneys with patients dying!
yes hanibal i agree it would give them flexibility in that direction also,which is good thing.hopefully won't be necessary!
The flexibility I would rather see in the direction, that in case of a failure of Iclaprim, a possibly new drug can be bought, which they try to bring that to the market. (They have alreade proven, to be able in a short time) As I wrote a few weeks ago, I´m rather cautious. Please attend the AGM and ask all this questions.
birdseye agree entirely with your comment re partnership.as i mentioned yesterday it gives them great potential flexibility and i am happy to take the guidance notes at face value as to the reasons.
thanks HJ.yes that one really did sound alarm bells
--> The.Italian
Re your post Sun 28Apr @1847: Nominal value/Placing price of 6p.
Well nipped in the bud matey, who knows how far
that could have snowballed in the wrong hands.
Could have changed the whole week ahead. Hugh.
If you needed to get a partnership after approval to bring the drug to market would you not need a large amount of shares to offer ?
Flag 1 was the new guy and I believe imo anyway this is flag 2.
Both a positive sign at present .
Thanks Italian.
small trader no one is suggesting that a value of 1p would be ascribed to any share issue/placement.the reference to 1p is simply a reference to the nominal value of the shares i.e. how they re denominated which denomination is fixed by the company when it is formed and can be changed by resolution if appropriate e.g. on a stock split or a consolidation.we are talking about how many shares the company is seeking formal authority to issue etc should the occasion arise which number is over 170 million.the value at which any placing took place would be determined at the time it took place and would depend on the usual factors e.g. the then current m/v of shares currently in issue any discount to such value given on issue etc.the nominal value of the shares has nothing to do with the market value when new shares are issued.so for example you can have shares with a nominal value of say10p which are actually trading at £1 or 1p.apologies if I'm stating the obvious but simply trying to clarify matters.also not suggesting there is going to be a placing of any or all the shares for which authority is being sought.pretty obviously there is going to be some sort of issue /fund raise but the details are completely unknown and will be determined by the circumstances at the time.
I do not think that is a placing of 170mln shares at 1p. If it is going to be at 1p then why did they raise the last one at 6p? If it is going to be at 1p then they would also be mentioning about the reasons for the discount on the prevailing market price at that time. To me it just only means that they are called penny shares as it is listed on AIM. So for a FTSE 100 share like Taylor wimpey, they call it 10p shares but that doesn't mean placing is done at 10p.
Jam2morrow yes i did wonder about the use of "renew" which is why i tried to find last years resolution but without success .personally I'm not worried about it at all.glad its all clear .cheers
Heidhoncho and Italian, Re-reading this and I think you are right. They are asking for the authority to issue up to 170M shares in the company. Of course the price they will issue them at will depend on market. Tis would explain the very exact number - almost exactly half of the 342M and a bit shares in issue.
I note that from the proposal notes:
'' Resolutions 9 and10 are asking shareholders to re-new until the conclusion of the 2020 AGM it's share issuance and pre-emption disapplication authorities''
So if it is to be re-newed then it is in place already, and just gives the company the authority to go ahead with a placing like they did last month. Up to 50% of the company.
Good work you two
exactly correct HeidHoncho
“ordinary shares of one penny each in the capital of the Company (“Ordinary Shares”) up to an aggregate nominal amount of £1,712,455“
Given that they have requested to have the opportunity to raise up to an aggregate “nominal” amount of £1,712,455 is that note allied to the ordinary share having a “nominal” value of £0.01 ?
i.e. that gives them the right to issue up to an additional 171,245,500 shares.
But it should be noted, that is just an authority to issue up to that number of shares without calling an EGM to raise more, not that they will use all, or indeed any, of that authority.
the nominal value of the shares would require a resolution for it to be changed.all issued shares have a nominal value of1p as would any new shares issued pursuant to the new authority sought in the AGM resolution.sorry but i think jam2morrows interpretation is incorrect.if passed they could issue £1.7m nominal value of shares ie170million plus shares.50%of the current shares in issue.happy to be proved wrong if someone can post a reasoned contrary view
The company proposes to have the ability to raise £1.7M cash quickly . Why they don't want to do it thru a placing and why the figure is so exact, to the last £, seems like they have something particular in mind. The 1p is just the par value of our shares, so don't worry about that, we won't be diluted to the tune of 170M shares. The placing last month was for MTFB ordinary 1p shares but they were placed at 6p .
Thanks Ivy for putting that link up. Does annoy me the language they use in these documents, makes it virtually unreadable. If that was the language they used in their NDA I'd give them a complete response letter straight away!
Are they all nominally 1p shares when issued, presumably they would be linked to the open market share price when they are issued.
The placing last year at 30p ish were 1p shares.
no i think you are quite correct hannibal.its exactly 50%of the current issued share capital imo.i may be wrong and happy to be corrected.i did try and find last years agm resolutions but all i could find were directions back to the motif website but never the actual detail.not really sure whether its a bad or good thing.from the perspective of potential dilution its not good but from the perspective of giving the bod potential firepower for fundraising/ partnership negotiations etc it may be very positive which is the spin its given in the notes to the resolutions.would be very interested in other posters views
I am still 'hoping' for 20p+ between now and mid May, scalp back 50% of my investment. Will still have 80% of the shares left in for result day.
Mostly i am day dreaming and no one in the real world around me wants to hear about mtfb :D.
upto 1 month later for FDA minutes there have been cases or earlier release I believe.
Squeaky Bum time for lots of investors planning to see this through.
What’s your opinion on news leaked before minutes are completed, a month seems a long time to not let the cat out of the bag. Imagine if they took on the new bloke after meeting, a feeding frenzy springs to mind. Lol
These are 1,7mln nominal, that equals 170mln shares at one p. Or am I wrong??
3rd May and minutes released one month kater
When is the FDA meeting scheduled for?