Member Info for dgdg1

Also the last sentence of the second last paragraph for some reason wasn't quoted. It says "It could go on sale by Christmas.". The issue being how many people will still have covid at that point given vaccines and natural immunity?

Sotrovimab gets emergency authorisation from FDA. Maybe they are authorising other drugs at the same time including possibly SNG, now that would explain the share price movement, let's see if there is an RNS in a few hours. You still would need to somehow guess what the total sales will be though....

mattw007, thanks for that.

Just because they are planning to be able to produce 100k doses a month does not mean that it is the likely demand. Also, evenn if it would be the demand at peak, this doesn't mean that it will stay at that level in the long run.

Actually finncap in 10.20 (before vaccines had been found to be successful) did not forecast 100k doses sold monthly (even though that was what the company was planning to produce) but peak yearly sales of £1.25bn starting 2021 or even end 2020 (or about 540k yearly doses sold, or less than half of 100k monthly doses). Presumably that was only for one or two years and substantially less for other years when they expected that by then people would have natural immunity or vaccines would be developed. We don't know what exactly they forecast. But we do know that they surely were not allowing for the quick production of vaccines. In the event, vaccines were developed and produced more quickly than anyone expected. By the time SNG is approved a very high proportion of the world will have been vaccinated or been infected, so sales have to be much lower than what they forecast in 10.2020, whatever that was.

I don't know myself what that should be but there is no way we are talking about 100k monthly sales indefinitely (which you are using to then calculate long term profits and fair value). Even finncap (before the vaccines were developed) didn't expect anything like that.

If I understand correctly, it looks like tamiflu was meant to be given to anyone who got flu (or even before they caught it), to avoid potential complications. By contrast, SNG is only given to people who are breathless, which is only a very small proportion of the people that catch covid. So clearly one needs far fewer doses to be stockpiled.

hanoihank, thanks for that, that's interesting, will try to look into that to see how comparable it is.

Mattrempit, to be honest I am not sure myself how to calculate it. I would need to know how much they could sell each dose for, what their costs are, how often each person with COPD would on average have an attack which would need treating specifically with SNG (as opposed to something else). I don't have these figures. I am simply quoting from finncap's valuation of 52p for COPD which one can reasonably assume is not massively underestimated.

Tonlin, thank you for you reply.

Certainly it will be a useful and probably life-saving product if it is approved, which it probably will be. But with all that the question is how much will they sell? Yes there will be some stockpiling but how much? I mean they are not going to buy now enough to last for the duration of an entire future unknown pandemic. At most they would buy enough to last maybe the first months of a pandemic, but they would also rely on the fact that by then they would be able to buy more of th product which would be manufactured at the time. You have to reach some numerical guess based on something and then work out the profits you think that will produce and arrive at a fair market cap, otherwise it's just illogical and you would buy at any price.

So I am still looking for some figures. If no-one answers this I'll try not to keep asking this as people will just decide I'm a deramper and start to get abusive. So please someone, refer me to a calculation (which allows for the fact that by the time this is approved much of the world's population are probably going to be vaccinated or have natural immunity or live in countries that probably won't be able to afford much to buy this). And by all means include estimates of stockpiling, just explain how they are calculated.

Yes I know they have a target price of 505p but most of that is made up of the value derived from covid. The last note that I could find where they showed a breakdown was the one of 16.10.20 when they said 52p for COPD, 9p for LOXL2, 336p for covid and 24p cash, total 421p. After that they increased the total because they increased the covid value, but I couldn't find a breakdown which shows exactly how much for each, I assume they left COPD unchanged at 52p. So I am simply saying why did someone post that the COPD value by itself was £5?

dactions - I have no idea why you think I am not really interested based on what I said about FUM - I have been a big supporter of FUM - why does that mean I am not interested in this? I am certainly interested. I would love to buy if I could justify it to myself, but for that I need some clear figures that I can understand how they are calculated. I mean especially in respect of the vaccine issue and how much demand is likely to remain for covid. Is someone going to help me?

I honestly don't understand where people get their figures from. Fincap's note of 16.10.20 estimated that COPD was worth 52p a share (using 30% chance of success, admittedly you could push that % up a lot, but still nowhere near £5). Unfortunately some people are starting to see me as a deramper which I am certainly not - I will be very happy to hear alternative sources of information and ways of calculating value, I have no particular knowledge or strong reason to think finncap are right, but I would highly doubt that they would underestimate the value so much, given that brokers tend to overestimate if anything.

Syn00gold, please could you refer me to your posts where you say you showed calculations of value. I am interested to know how you have estimated potential sales especially in the light of the vaccines. Thanks.

Thanks for responses. I think it's reasonable to accept that the product probably works and wouldn't mind even if they changed their 70% chance of success to even 90%. But I don't feel confident on their process of forecasting the demand level. I would ideally like to see some facts and figures. For all I know it might be righr or even an underestimate. The problem is I have lost confidence in their forecast as they haven't properly explained how they got to this sales number and particularly because they didn't adjust it at all after the vaccines came out, which can't be right. So if I have lost confidence in them how I meant to form a fair estimate of what the likely sales will be from say end 2021 when approval would hopefully be given?

As for their assumed sale price of $3000 I have no idea whether this is fair but would probably take their word for it although I also have to be accepting their cost asssumptions, and I don't even know what they are or how they are calculated. Perhaps they are explained in one of their notes but I haven't found it. This is not really my main point, which is really about the demand level, but I am just mentioning this as it slightly adds to the general lack of clarity of where they have taken their figures from.

Perhaps Numis have explained things more clearly but I just don't have access to their notes. If anyone has access I would be grateful if they could post some of it up.

It's a shame because the product looks promising and is bound to have sales for covid as well as probably for asthma and COPD when they manage to finish testing it and getting approved for them, as well as possibly other things. The shares may do very well, but how can I responsibly take a proper view without properly-based forecasts?

I only have access to finncap (via Research Tree). What I don't understand is that in October 2020 they had a target sp of 420p based on a 70% chance of success and peak sales of £1.25bn. But in November 2020 when Pfizer announced high success with their vaccine (along with other companies) they didn't reduce their peak sales forecast or target price, arguing that there was still a big need for treatments. They then increased the target to 505p in January when the activ 2 trial started (even though that is a home based trial so now seemingly unlikely to be particularly successful).

With all the worldwide vaccine successes now apparent, surely there will be much less covid around by the end of the year even in countries that have been slower to get vaccine supplies, as by then surely most countries will have vaccinated many and have much more herd immunity from further infections. So surely the expected peak sales must be a lot less than what they were before the vaccine success was discovered.

They are expecting government stockpiling which I suppose is reasonable to an extent. Although I don't know how anyone can try to forecast how much this will actually happen. But even if it happens I come back to my point that however you look at it the expected sales must be a lot less than they were compared to October 2020 before the vaccines came out.

This is a genuine question, I'm not deramping. I did buy some shares but when this question hit me I sold. Would be very grateful for some answers.

"This appeals process has ended in Dubai, but the battle for control of the yacht continues in the Marshall Islands, whose flag the ship sails under, and regarding the Liechtenstein entity which owns the yacht, publicly available British and Marshall Islands court documents show." https://www.reuters.com/article/dubai-russia-divorce-yacht-idINKBN25G268

Seems to imply that the only things missing (as of 10.2020) were British and Marshall Island rulings (there was a British ruling not long ago in favour of Tatiana). So maybe now everything is now in place. Not that I fully understand the intricacies of this court(s) battle, but it sounds a bit like that.

Ananda, clearly you are new here, those who have been here longer have put up with nearly 400 negative comments from booth, there has been much speculation why he is doing it, but clearly he is dishonest and has some dark purpose. I also think there may well be some psychological issue at play. I say it's good to keep bashing him although others think he should just be filtered and ignored.

There have been several theories posited as to the reasons for his constant deramping - eg he's a shorter, wants to buy more cheaper, is a paid deramper, has a grudge against the company, etc.

But to be honest with you I am now thinking that even if one of these reasons (or a similar reason) are true, it still doesn't explain the absurd extent of the campaign as well as the extreme nature of the twisting of facts. I think you have to assume that he also has some psychological issue - it's just not something a normal person would do, even with a strong interest. Although if he is a paid deramper and gets paid per word you could possibly argue that he just wants to write as much as he can and doesn't care what he writes or how stupid or twisted it is. Maybe.

I think we can safely ignore the anonymous doctor that you "know".

As for your comparison to MED2002 being available as a special, well there's not much comparison. At the time the product hadn't been proven effective for ED. As the company said at the time "Specials are medicines that have not been authorised and which are requested and prescribed for the treatment on a named patient basis only by appropriately qualified doctors under their own authority. Such requests can only be made subject to a number of conditions being met including the absence of licensed alternatives."

Furthermore "The promotion of unlicensed medicines is prohibited by Human Medicines Regulations 2012."

So hardly a comparison to a product which has been proven and approved for sale to treat ED and may be promoted.

People will be told by their doctors to try it.

Booth says: "They say the share is cheap then if its so cheap why do they need to tell us its cheap? They should just be buying the shares and keeping it to themselves that its cheap " . Err, are you listening to yourself? If you think the share is expensive then you don't need to tell us, just sell and leave us alone.

Yes. just to tell anyone who didn't see those posts, it basically was a question of why booth claimed to have had shares from early on and never sold (because he was persuaded by reading this board that other people would push the price up on news) - and yet he had himself labelled the share as "strong sell" in his first post in March. There were all sorts of attempts at answers which didn't actually answer the question.