Member Info for Digittt

I did google it...the only references google found were your posts here on LSE.

Repeating it without a source doesn't look good. We presented in 2020, that was the one reference already confused. The actual program for ASH that includes late breaking abstracts doesn't have us in.

Except that was in 2020. NCTrade telling porkies.

Let-It-Roll...that's one huge assumption on Spring talks with big pharma. What data did we even have then? I'm a supporter of the company, but I'm going to assume the conversations started much more recently, because that's common sense. As to whether the convos impacted the pace of tech transfer to Made, I seriously doubt that. Our negotiating position is strengthened by more results. What does help though (in terms of accelerating timing etc) is if multiple pharmas are chasing us which Vlad's comment suggests.

Oh pull the other one NP, you’re not fooling anyone. You are continually trying to sow panic about a potential funding need and hang your hat on the company’s words but omit the words providing strong comfort that the trial results so far and convo with pharma leaves the directors reasonably certain that there is a fail safe. Your intent is clear and no it’s not balanced in any way. Perhaps you will now revert to getting this message deleted as you are wont to.

Nope NP...you're highlighting your own issues there. You continually...and I mean continually...with lots of CAPS repeat that these are the company's words - that the funds from the raise are insufficient and more funding will be needed early next year. We know that more funding will be needed - source TBD. But you completely omit that the directors of the company in the absence of funds from other sources are reasonably certain they can raise it from a pharma etc. That is the game you play...mixed with an obsession on CAPS lock. Your pretence it exactly that, pretence. How long before you get this message deleted?

NotPosting...cut your one-eyed tripe. The company also says the below. But this post will probably be deleted like similar ones were earlier in the week. Your motives and lack of balance is clear. This is all in a risk factors section of a prospectus where the Directors will never outright say they are certain or confident due to their liability risk.

"In circumstances where insufficient funding were to be forthcoming to enable the Company to implement its business plan through 2026, the Directors would use all endeavours to sell an interest in the development of HG-CT-1, as well as its other product candidates. The Directors are reasonably confident that they would be able to do so based on the data received to date in the Phase 1 trial of HG-CT-1 and discussions with a large pharmaceutical company"

Pumpky...Checkricky is a green box, has been for a long time.

NNP…been out celebrating life just home now. Sorry I’m responding so late…and stop for a second. Still obvious BS from you. You have zero defense. Trying to create a storm around the risk analysis / factors part of a prospectus / IM. You are showing yourself as either inexperienced or just holding a grudge. Feels like both. The risk factors section of a prospectus is a cover mgmt arse section. Every IM / prospectus has it. Doesn’t mean it’s wrong but it is management making sure they are protected if the worst case eventuates. Certainly it is raising the stressors to the business for the next 12 months (going concern definition). You are picking the words which are set to protect the directors in the worst instance and parading them around like some clue you discovered to bring down a house of cards.’ You know that’s not the case. Your insistence of championing the negative message is clear. You’ve lost any view of impartiality. Don’t try and pretend this is a personal vendetta against some righteousness you’ve convinced yourself of… you fundamentally are an a. $$

A moment of unity is rare on this bulletin board but perhaps we can just take a quiet moment to raise a glass and celebrate all the posters on this board who don't use excessive line breaks. It's Monday morning, so it's OK if the glass is porcelain and has caffeine in it.

VCohen, is it fair to say you are bearish on every of the 3 shares you posted on with your 1 day old ID?

The CLN's were CLN's as the company was offered the money and didn't have headroom at the time per LSE rules (I think that's the restriction) to issue equity. For all intents and purposes it was always equity and the conversion is only happening now as the headroom has opened up for them to convert to equity. In my view it shouldn't impact the assessment of HEMO as it's been known about and it appeared clear as to why it had been structured like it was.

Alde - I love the comparisons to trillion dollar companies with thousands if not hundreds of thousands of employees. But to clarify, a timeline Vlad did give before was "years and billions"...I'm not saying I'm against HEMO being a trillion dollar company, but...

NP where do you come up with these invaluable nuggets of wisdom.

“ Warrants that are exercised or sold when there’s strong demand, especially when backed by good news, will usually have far less impact on the share price than those sold when things are quieter, which could have far more impact. It also depends on how controlled or aggressive the selling is.”

Switch warrants for shares in your above statement and you might even be able to post that as a separate nugget you’re telling folks to go suck.

Alde, stop your twaddle. The warrants are known about and provide funding. If you're so bearish, sell your free ride and buy back when it's £5 - but you won't. I'm not going to guess where things go right now, but we seem to have found some stability for the moment at this price with the 1k sales seemingly dried up. Keep trying to chisel away and create doubt that the LTH'ers are playing games, they're not. Saying you'll be bullish on £12 and volume...that's about the most bland statement you can make. Can't imagine anyone not being bullish with volume and £12...recent history says we would go rocketing past.

Alde - you're showing your bias here. Cash would be needed if it doesn't come in from other sources, but not now. We had £2m or so come in the last month or so, expect some more from warrant conversions and Vlad only ~3months ago that his burn rate was down to £250k - he even mentioned the reducing cost base in his interviews. He has himself also said that Estonia might raise cash. So you can fearmonger like you want, but you have an agenda.

Stevey - you're very clearly playing your role in this...many LTH'ers have said they're fully pregnant. I'm surprised you haven't come out with the "Why won't Vlad buy his own shares if they're such a good bet" malarkey. You're an idiot.

Stevey, LTH'es are heavily pregnant and over-extended.

Stevey, your agenda / lack of knowledge is clear. Pick your poison. The cash from the CLN's is in the business already, them converting to equity is a non-cash event that we all know about. Warrants being exercised will push money into the company though which is helpful and any related dilution on those, is not news. You rush to say Vlad needs money...not currently and only possibly. Absent anything coming out of Estonia or on any other parts of the business (sub-letting lab etc etc)....he will eventually need some, but we know the burn rate is low, he's sat on some cash....so it's not now, it's not this year - so stop your fake fearmongering.

Stevey being an a$$hat. Get a life.

He's also presenting made-up LTH's intentions and made-up behavior as fact. He's an idiot.

If only we got a warrant every time someone said the warrant seller was done / going to be done.

JustAManNotPosting - you seem to have time on your hands and are really hyper-focussing and obsessing. Perhaps time to pick a healthier hobby.