Member Info for Daveavt

Which part of 'they may have been doing 499.99k' last year do you not understand??? They are already a customer, they are already spending money, it's not an EXTRA 500k. Jesus.

And I'd love to know where you think another mere 500k spend from a customer is going to appear from. It's only been increased by Merck to 500 this year from what they normally spend, because they will be doing some clinical trials, you know from the years of doing pre clinical tests, because you know, that's how long drug trials take, and hence why Merck has been with them since 2012 and still after all these years are up to spending 500k. These new customers would take years to get up to that level, if they even proceed to do so. It's like you think some customer is going to appear and say 'we need you to do 10 clinical trial models for us.'

Shaz, you're still not getting this are you. I'm not including previous years, I'm including what they would have spent this year!

SandMartin, what apple failed to tell you is they have been working with Merck since 2012. The price you've bought in at is OK, but don't expect much over 8p on news.

It wasn't a 500k contract, they were already spending a few hundred k. Let's say the same revenues as your local pub.

Because of the 25 percent wide spread.

It won't identify itself, it's rare that they do, in case is doesn't go well. It's very common for pharmas to stay anonymous, to the point that they make companies sign NDAs.

'12p a mere 100 percent from here'....here is already 600 percent up from what it was, I think you forget that. Even Jim made a point of this.

What, apart from the fact we've never had a rise into the 15/20p range? Jesus, the next day after the grand rampy news and 30p spike it was down to 12.

Sounds like a lovely trading range.

Did I not just write that? Is there an echo in here?

It's name was released years ago, it's no secret it's been working with them, it was mentioned in rns's back in 2015. So yes pro active is wrong on that part, right on all the other bits it copied from my posts.

Bit of a coincidence that pro active investors start telling everyone about it being not the Merck in the U.S but Merck in Germany a day after I post it all over this board eh..

Yes it was mentioned in previous rns's.

It doesn't say that at all. It says it has an agreement to use the services of an unnamed company for free if it wishes. What is this 'derisked' nonsense and 'blood cancer cure'?

....'As such, we can not be seen to be impartial in relation to the outcome of our reports.'

And on only that, here you are on a share forum trying to pump your own report. But you're 'transparent' right? Lol

How can someone be 'transparent' if they are invested ha? They even said in that bit I posted '*However, as a consequence of this alignment, our vested interest is in an increase in value of the subject company’s equity. As such, we can not be seen to be impartial in relation to the outcome of our reports. *' So what is it? Lol

This is from aligns own report at the bottom...'DISCLAIMER & RISK WARNING It is the policy of ALIGN Research to only cover companies in which we have conviction in the investment case. Our “Conviction Buy” recommendation is derived from our conviction in **either taking equity as payment for our research services, or applying our fee to the purchase of equity in a covered company whilst absorbing the cash cost of our freelance analyst payments. ** Catenae Innovation is a research client of Align Research. Align Research & a ** Director of Align Research own shares in Catenae Innovation**. Full details of our Company & Personal Account Dealing Policy can be found on our website http://www.alignresearch.co.uk/legal/ ALIGN Research has made every reasonable effort to ensure the accuracy of the information in our research reports and on our website, although this can not be guaranteed. Our research reflects the objective views of our team of analysts. As we actively seek to take the majority of our fees by the way of equity payment in the companies we cover, we believe that we are aligned with both investors and the subject company. Additionally, we only write about those companies that we have conviction in. **However, as a consequence of this alignment, our vested interest is in an increase in value of the subject company’s equity. As such, we can not be seen to be impartial in relation to the outcome of our reports. **

Unfortunately for tv boy, the market doesn't care about free services from an unnamed company. Could be absolutely anyone. People don't care about interim things like this until it's at an end goal.