Member Info for ColdFishPie

Thai...it has been discussed a thousand times on here why it was worth investing in the re-launch etc. We discussed yesterday and we know you are trading it so im not surprised you dont like my posts. Your comments yesterday proved how little you know about the history and even what has gone on in the last few weeks but you have made good money so congrats on that...hope for my sake you make more:)

City, i have reduced my portfolio from 10 to 5 in the last couple of years and put more money into mtfb than i should have...so im concerned about losing it all...cant afford too! I am unhappy with the bod actions, concerned about the change in tone and worried about whats really behind the crl with regards the fda...they are unanswerable to anyone....nobody will give a toot cahoot about them not approving iclaprim if it comes to that. Im not concerned with those who have just bought and dont like my view, im not saying its the complete truth because i dont know for sure but highlighting what i see as maybe wrong. I would be amazed if any lth sold now...especially based on any comment i make.

Ian...as a long term holder you know as well as i do that the commitee who rejected iclaprim stated that it should not be developed further....that was due to both safety and efficacy issues...so its not misleading and its not a deramp because it is widely available in the public domain. Further, the former lead scientist at the fda who was not happy that the fda had given the new trials the go ahead was adamant that it should not be developed because there was already around a dozen similiar drugs on the market. Now...i invested knowing this and still believe that iclaprim has a differentiator but my worry is that the fda dont think that it has enough. I think there is a clear difference between what the company said in the crl rns and the cc....to what has been stated in the placing rns. Im not acting on it because i have decided to see it through come what may. I also dont care about ramp/deramp between now and whatever, those who buy and sell at this point will have no effect on the outcome or my outcome. However, as stated...i think the bod should be acting differently give the position that lth are in and that fact that after 5 years, they could be looking at failure for everyone....most of the bod will have become millionaires from mtfb during that time. Is a little show of loyalty and truth too much to ask for considering ther perilous position we find ourselves in....is it too much to ask them to take some responsibility for some dodgy decisiond at best?

Hi ian, Not all of the data from arpidas phase 3 trials have been made public but yes, we do know the history of their relationship with the fda. However, 17-2 of the external panel voted against its approval...do you think that was all down to the relationship? Im not trying to scaremonger anyone, im loosing a fortune and could be wiped out but im gambling just in case. Im not interested in buyers or sellers now...im only interested in approval chances. And concerned ofcourse that there is a lot more to this than mtfb are letting on....it hardly looks like lumsden and co will give 2 cahoots for pi's if this is not approved, they will walk on with a bag full of swag...no news on them forfeiting salaries or taking part in the placing!

Hi ivy, Thats what bothers me...im not so sure that the points would be the ast/alt levels since as discussed here, there is such minimal difference to the comparative approved drugs. Mtfb rapped it up by stating that additional data is required and we have discussed to death what that might look like but by stating points...the crl sounds like it was a lot more specific than mtfb made out in the valentines rns or the conference call. Thats no surprise because it is called a complete response letter after all, i just feel a little bit less comfortable that during the cc...mtfb made out that they did not know the specifics...points are normally quite specific. So, if they do know....it does make me wonder if there is more to this than meets the eye. Im not generally a conspiracy theorist and would love to think that the fda are a shinning example but as proven in other things like the oil industry...our american cousins are not backwards for coming forward when their monopoly is threatened:) I keep coming back to the fda stating that iclaprim should not be developed further....the question now for me is not 'should iclaprim be approved' but have the fda just went through the motions!

I have never had a premium accounts. Again, i think you might be confusing what i am referring too with points...its got nothing to do with the options what i am talking about. The points prior too mtfb are important and as someone mentioned earlier, why did they give qifd and fast track...lets see. I invested because for of the change in trial design as recommended by the fda and it looked like they had changed their stance. They have...but im not so sure about iclaprim!

Hi ian...not sold and wont do because too low down, would rather just gamble and lose it...so be it! However, not happy with the feedback and performance from the company at all which suggests to me that they think they might have been set up also...the least they could have done is suspend as much costs as they could and inform us since they have had a fantastic run and we have been bushed. Looks to me like they are going through the motions with their actions.

I am a very long term holder in mtfb but i am not very positive now.....will grant you that. However, my post re points is interesting for debate....either you are totally misunderstanding it or you are the one playing the game with your newly purchased shares but the long termers will get the point im making and its an important one imo.

Im not sure you do because your reply was about as thick as f.. That said....if your happy to believe that last nights big buy is a sign of approval them im not really surprised:)

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47715415

Thaiflyer....have a think about it mate. If you dont understand the question...no point in trying to answer it.

Post should state.. That the fda said that iclaprim should not be advanced. I wish they had stuck to their word!

Ivy...not seen you posting for a few days. In the placing rns....the company states that the company and the fda will discuss the points raised in the CRL during the meeting. Why do you think that the company is not confirming what these points are and why only now are they stating that the crl contained points? Wtf is this all about......the information surrounding arpida never being made public and the fda at that point stating that iclaprim should be advanced, a crl that is baffling and now the company we are invested in...hiding the true nature of the failure to gain approval and keeping investors and the market in the dark. I thought we were supposed to be living in an open society these days. My view is now that the fda has no intention of approving iclaprim....they never have and at worst they will either get it shelved for another 5 or 6 years or bin it completely. There's too much opposition to it within the game and they can just do as they please, money talks and the fda is no exception. Looks to me like mtfb have been played here....what a mess lumsden has made of this one!

The cash burn is a disgrace and the ceo should be ashamed of himself! He blew loads of money on a pointless nasdaq listing, he falied too raise during the months leading up to decision when the sp went in their favour, he failed with the submission and now he is failing every shareholder left. How many more failures can one man have....he's a jinx and theres jo chance of approval with him at the helm. Get Lumsden out now is the call!!!!!

I think baxter will be feeling too fizzed off to post. At the end of the day....this is just another aim story, this market has been a disaster for pi's but nice get rich schemes for bods and the insti's/mm's love it! Its ok for them, big salaries and generous options etc...wether some of them start out with good intentions who knows but they soon change their spots when it comes to the lolly. I honestly think that was the reason mike parted company...he wanted this ramped up, packaged up and sold up so that everyone got out with some decent money. Others are in it for something different but will make sure they are millionaires along the way, how it works out for pi's....who gives a fizz:)

The see bod have done the big boys a nice turn here so ken and the team will be flavour of the month with those who have got the clout, hes going nowhere unless jacko thinks that its time for a new lead. No too consolidation please....it will matter knowt in the grand scheme apart from wasting cash.

Yes...go along with that, lets see what surprises ab has for his favourite pi's coming. He's not done much in the way of favours up till now....hh!

Bit behind the times and missed yesterday......thankfully:). All a bit of a shock raising that much and at such a low price so thats a lot more dilution than i expected...it would have hurt in the mid 4 after the fca rns but its truly shocking that they had to go that low for me! What with huge free options and distributing shares at mates rates....there is certainly not much doubt now that we are very much 2nd class citizens in here. I have been hoping that jack would buy some to show a bit of confidence at 5p but wtf...does it really matter now.....gutted and another big hope up the damn swanney at least for a whilrle it looks like.

Thanks n4....i tried to research the liver consultant stuff and drew a blank although i would be surprised if mtfb did not engage with them and even more surprised if covance have fluffed their lines on that score. It did bother me when you see twitter users like 'mathius' and his huge amount of followers stating on the day of the crl that they had spoken with mtfb who confirmed that 3 top us liver consultants had given it the green light and mtfb would meet with the fda within a couple of weeks and approval would be forthcoming very quickly...clearly misleading shall we say!

N4....where does mtfb state they engaged 3 independent liver experts to look at the data?