Adrian Hargrave, CEO of SEEEN, explains how the new funds will accelerate customer growth Watch the video 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.
What value would you place should 1801 prove superior to Deucravacitinib?
It will be better in Psoriasis, of that l have the upmost confidence
Are you speaking of efficacy? If 1801 has superior efficacy then the value is huge...
However 1801 hasn't finished phase 1a safety trials yet. And Sareum may not have the funding to put 1801 through a phase 1b / 2a efficacy trial.
This is the issue. Sareum might not have funding to find out if it has a superior product.
It really doesn't matter if it is 'potentially' better - if it doesn't have the money to demonstrate this.
This is why the share price is where it is. This is also why investors are sick of hearing how good it 'might' be, at some point in the future 'if' there's any funding left.
This is pretty much the same as Synairgen and numerous other AIM bio Pharma’
They can’t get the product through trials and they don’t know how to commercialise it
Neither company is investible
Https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/gilead-pays-435m-xilios-early-phase-il-12-prospect-entering-race-after-rivals-exit
This is what we're waiting for, all genuine investors and LTH are waiting for a license, obviously we could sell, and probably have sold on previous highs making a substantial amount of money. To say it's not investible is very short sighted.
Nobody cares about what happened with finances when they sign a license, they need the compound to be viable to do that and to date nothing suggests it's not a blockbuster.
Take a look at Jeb Keipers comments before Nimbus signed a $4 billion deal for their TYK2 compound.
We've moved to a P2a strategy, possibly OZ driven as original admission was with MHRA. Those who talked about doing the trial in UK - no chance. MHRA are the ones that set us on this path of financial woe in the first place.
Num4, I think you hit the nail on the head.
Sar would be crazy to return to UK shores to do a phase 2. We've spoken before about how broken public services are right now. I don't believe the recent report that things have improved. There is no guarantee things are better and I also think there are wider games being played.
We have developed a (positive) relationship with authorities down under. Our molecule has already been authorised to be put into humans and presumably we are aware of the infrastructure required to conduct a trial. I remember reports regarding how many psoriasis patients there are in Melbourne and consistency between phase 1 and 2 trials will avoid duplication and with the relationships already established, will surely speed things up. It's a no brainer. It would be madness to bring operations back to a stagnant and broken Britain.
Ben, your right there on Broken Britain. It is going to get worse before it gets better, if it ever does. Many people are still in denial about what’s happened and is happening.
Superitch, simple question, if the company is uninvestable why are you here?
Maybe the individuals taking part in the placing disagree.
There is one key difference between synairgen and here. Synairgen enjoyed an elevated sp right up to the point it's trial failed.
That isn't the case here at all
Thimk there is a metaphor or two that would sum up a return to the mercy of the MHRA. Once bitten, twice shy. Or what about another, fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.
Hi Ben/Num4 - I only floated the idea of doing the trial in the UK as the Nucleus Network don't appear to do P2a trials, their focus seems to be P1 (see first link below).
https://www.parexel.com/application/files/resources/assets/Australia%20Clinical%20Trials%20Article_Second%20in%20a%20three-part%20series%20(1).pdf
This other link might be interesting to some as it talks about pricing strategies (not that we're anywhere near that point yet but interesting all the same).
https://www.parexel.com/application/files/resources/assets/Australia%20Regulatory%20Market%20Access%20Article_Third%20in%20a%20three-part%20series%20(1).pdf