Member Info for elcap

RIP Shane Warne.

Sad news Les. All you can do make the most of the time you have together. Fill everyone of those days with joy. Elcap

I am amazed at the negativity. Did anyone believe that there would be II's jumping buying in on day 1? I didn't. This is a marathon not a sprint. I am relieved the consolidation has happened and is now behind us. We are now positioned for large investors to jump onboard, and I'm sure they will. SDC1801 on track and SDC1802 first in class. What's not to like. Yes we might have to wait 6 - 12 months but we are in the shop window and that shop is now in the high end part of the town. The shoppers will have plenty of cash in their wallets. AIMHO Elcap

The positives - that consolidation is happeneing. We have 1st in class for Cancer treatment. And markets for our molecules are going to explode.
Negatives - our BOD can't keep a laptop on.
Positives far outweigh the negatives. But still frustrating.

Do the board feel the appointment of Peel Hunt has been beneficial? If so why?
0 votes Delete

03:04:59 pm
Do the Board feel enogh attention has been put on Public Relations/ messaging? It feels very much like an afterthought, or a necessary evil.

Their laptop ran out of power!!!!!!

First in class for SDC1802 for treatment of cancer!!!!!!!!!!

or shorts closing

I saw a £3M & a £2M trade going through. Looked likes buys

He's also been saying how smart Putin is invading Ukraine. Trump allowed Putin to be in position he is in now.

I agree with Seawolf. Consolidation in itself doesn't attract, ultimately it will be the science. However Consolidation means the science is displayed in a bigger shop window, in a better part of town with a higher footfall, footfall which is generated by II's and HNWI. Being in that eviroment should mean the science becomes even attractive, and potentially with a higher price tag.

That PH have been brought onboard to attract Institutional Investors, therefore any reports produced by their analyst's will NOT be available for public comsumption, ie will be for PH Client's eyes only. SAR BoD will not be able to release that info to the retail investors (PI's). They may be able to release something to general market, or SAR BoD might be able to use some elements to put in RNS.
It is clear (IMHO) that consolidation and strategy to seek II's are linked. In principle I do not disagree with the strategy. The upside is that with higher share price we attract more II's, providing a more stable SP, access to areas otherwise closed off to penny shares, with ultimate aim of selling of individual products / molecules or selling company lock, stock and barrell.
Downside is we are no longer privy to the same information that ALL other investors (II's) will get. Moving us either further into the passenger seats.
Do the pro's outweigh the cons. In my book YES. Bearing in mind how poor SAR are at PR/comms, is it going to make any difference if we are even further back in the queue?
Perhaps having II's and more HNWI's onboard will actually make SAR start taking the PR/comms more seriously so we win anyway.
If I am correct in saying that PH are not going to be releasing any reports etc for general consumption, then the actual question that the BoD should be dealing answering is: Why have the BoD not communicated this to us? The whole handling of PH's appointment and the move to consolidate shares has been amateurish at best.

SAR's BoD need to issue RNS clarifying all the points and putting further meat on bone around strategy and they need to do it prior to EGM.

I agree with the strategy, or what I beleive the strategy to be. But BoD need to articulate clearly exactly what that is. THAT is the big issue that needs addressing.
AIMHO
Elcap

My understanding is that PH have been brought in to attract Institional Investors, and as such any broker notes / reports that they issue will not be for the benefit of retail market (PI's), but rather for the eyes of their Institional Investors (clients) only.
Elcap

I have thought long and hard on this. I have decided I will vote YES for consolidation. It will (I believe) be the best thing for SAR in the long run, therefore best for shareholders. We need to be careful not to conflagrate the consolidation question with the perception that the BoD are not proficient at messaging and general PR. By all means vote NO if you wish, but make sure the reasons for voting NO are solely based on the consolidation question and not the PR shortcomings of the BoD, or the current share price. Whichever way the vote goes I would hope it is based on the question, rather than it being a general protest vote.
AIMHO
Elcap

Toon - you are correct we are all different. Where you are wrong is that we do not need to respect your view.

Toon - words fail me! Tramore sums up my thoughts perfectly (a couple of posts below).

Les- Terribly sad news for you and your family. Stay strong!

Basser - It means an informal coversation style production whereby a moderator interviews, chats with key person about the company, product, direction company is taking, the key persons vision of where they want to take it etc etc. It's supposed to be a new fangled way of getting further insight into the business in a more informal setting, enabling the key person to speak without constraints about their business and their hope and dreams for their business.
I have had to do a few of these in my current role within the company I work for. (As an aside I always insist in having a large whiskey in my hand, so as to make it a more authentic "fireside" chat. The C Suite always roll their eyes when I do this but they've never said No).
Elcap

FYI - I have not had a response yet from PH to my email last week. I will be making myself a real pain in their derrierre if nothing received by Friday. In respect of Consolidation. I am not a fan if at the current SP. Although it makes sense if SP is higher and there is a strategy behind the decision. (BoD will have to articulate that). Bigger concern is that Tim told us weeks ago that they are looking to Consolidate shares but has done nothing since. They need to update us PDQ as to when & why they plan to do this. The uncertainty is no good for man nor beast. It was naive comment to make if they were not ready to proceed immediately. I still massively believe in SAR and it's products, but they need to get their **** together in respect of the markets / SP.
AIMHO
Elcap

In the enviroment in which I work everything you say or write is potentially discoverable if you end up in court. Deliberately misleading Clients', investors can be quite a serious thing. That is why I am sure he was telling me the truth that PH's appointment was done quickly" and the speed in which it happened was "unusual". That's what he told me, therefore I have to believe him.
I am sure his report will be forthcoming in the very near future.
Elcap
(P.s. Even this post could, and would be discoverable and used as evidence should their ever be the need).

Further more, whether it was a brush off or not it is irrelevant. If I was going to "brush someone off" I would have done it so that I didn't admit to having not done something. All that will do is make that person chase me in a months time for an update on the thing that I said I hadn't done yet. We then have to repeat the brush off each time revealing the fact that I'm brushing them off and making it clear I don't care about them or the Client. Each time I would lose credibility.

Hence I have emailed him again today. If I get no response I will email his boss, and his bosses boss, and his bosses bosses boss and so on until I get the correct answer.

I too know how big business works. I am in it. I don't have to generate revenue for him, what I offer is every time I get the "brush off" I will go out of my way to make a nuisance of myself. You will be surprised how successful that tactic is.

He will be able to see who I am and what I do for a living if he checks me out on Linked in. He has my details.

Thank you for the advice.

Elcap