Member Info for Florida

SamBar - a couple of points - If you are making direct assertions that someone is deliberately intending to mislead, you should first accumulate sound evidence to secure your claim, not guess or post without knowing. it is also poignant to fulfil your everyday desires and capital gains not at the expense of others. Trying to deliberately negatively manipulate the price to the detriment of all long term holders is no gentlemanly act I can assure you.

Sambar - the strain of not being able to buy at 4.5p must be having a tremendous effect on your cognitive ability to read what has actually been written. I cannot recall having said a partner is in the offing at any time. I merely suggested how a potential partner might view 201. Is it not logical to assume that at some point 201 will require the services of a company that can market the product. Hense, some form of partner or partnership is inevitable.

As far as I am aware every product in existence has an historical lifespan dating back many years. It's the system we built in to protect the public. So what's 13 years got to do with the price of fish?.

You also seem to have a problem with the way 201 is used. Please read the following -

Eligible Patients - RNS: 19th May 2020
"Adult men (over the age of 18), with incurable locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer who
have relapsed following radiotherapy treatment, are in ‘watchful waiting’ or where a policy of
intermittent hormone therapy had been decided".

This covers about 90% of all men diagnosed with Prostate Cancer.

RNS: 16th December 2019 - "VAL201 has been developed in collaboration with Cancer Research (CRUK) and is a decapeptide with potential in treating hormone-dependent and hormone-independent prostate cancer, currently a poorly served multi-billion dollar commercial market.

Dr Satu Vanikka, CEO of ValiRx Plc, commented:

"With prostate cancer reported this month in an academic study as being the most common cancer in men in the UK* and with an estimated 1.3 million new cases of prostate cancer occurring worldwide last year**, it is truly exciting to see VAL201 approaching the conclusion of its Phase I/II first-in-man study."

"I look forward to regulatory approval of the trial data being speedily reached and the opportunity of potentially demonstrating that VAL201 can address this widespread and often fatal disease in men."

These are not the words of a man referring to a small section of the so called billion dollar market.

I must say I am having a real struggle with defining your motives. Your post on the 18th May showed your failure to acquire shares at the placing price. Every post from that point on, without exception was negative, including the desire to purchase at 4.5p. So please do not come on hear professing to be saint god knows who in the defence of truth. Learn to read first then come back to me with solid and sincere criticism.

Will be interesting to see how people view a company with the distinct possibility of bringing two products to market in relatively quick time. More to the point, how would a potential farm-in partner view 201 in particular. The way I see it, there are 1.3 million men diagnosed with Prostate Cancer each year. 70% are immediately place on open surveillance. This means that they have been diagnosed with cancer but their PSA (Prostate Specific Antigen) is not high enough to require immediate treatment. Some can be on surveillance for as long as 15 years. Which leads me to my point. The actual numbers diagnosed with cancer but are waiting in limbo runs into multiples of millions. So the market for 201 is vast. In addition, although we can only take a guess at the cost of a full course of 201 treatment, we can assume that it's not going to be cheap. It is the second most common cancer worldwide and this company has a remedial product in a very short pipeline.

Simms45 - LSE estimates the present value of this company at £920,000 (please see fundementals above). The additional placing shares are calculated at 6p, making the total value on the 26th May - £1.97m. Admittedly, it seems my estimation of value on the 26th May is a little on the low side, about the same percentage difference as is your evaluation a lttle on the
high side. As I understand it, 201 clinical trials have already been completed and are awaiting results. 301 is derived from the same compound as 201 which should make for a speedier conclusion to it's current pre-clinical trial. Nothing currently happening with 101, TRAC or FitBio and will be sold of in my view. Which leaves only 401, currently entering final set of clinical trials which are fully funded by Black Cat Bio Ltd. So I'm not quite sure what you mean by "so many trials"?

Excuse my spelling. Not so much typing, more to do with eyesight. Get fed up with looking for my reading glasses.

Interesting to see that Genedrive rose 21% on the announcement of it's CE mark. Certainly didn't end well admittedly, however, it does prove that the announcement itself has a positive impact.

Only my opinion of course, but surely £1.1m in the bank means as a cash shell with no assets, only cash, the company has to be worth £1.1m. Taking that into concideration, your estimate of the price dropping to 4.5p would in effect, give a capitalisation lower than it' s shell cash asset. Interesting view, certainly not impossible.

Viera - not so sure you'll get your 7p. Can't see too many selling and why would they. A capitalisation of £1.5m with £1.1m in the bank, five products, three to imminently sell or licence and two due to market within 6 months and a year. To top it off the strong possibility of a buy out from Bould, putting a further £1.3m in the bank. Why on earth would they sell.
IMHO DYOR

You would think I know how to spell "Here", must be the puffy stuff.

Cool stuff man, really cool stuff.

Market size and our percentage of that is expanding no doubt. Hears how I see progress. Phase one, receives the CE mark within the next four weeks. On the back of that, distribution of a number of products into the US, including Elucigene's new cancer product and the Illumina platform compatible IONA test. This then creates an opportunity to expand the presence of both YGEN and it's products by listing on Nasdeq. Slim I know, but possible. Price without listing - 22-26p, price with a listing - 80p. Phase two would begin on the 10th July with Final Results for year ending 31st March 2019. Within these results we will have an update on the previous three months trading 1st April to 30th June. This would include un-audited sales figures for that period, also including figures for Novacyt with projections for future sales for the period, including projected sales for Novacyt. Additionally, operational figures to show break-even surpassed. An important milestone, crucial and instrumental in the establishment of a new pricing threshold. Further to this, new broker estimations and forecast from Stifel. Stifel estimation at 30P. Price actually reached by the 20th July 35p. Phase three, nothing ever happens in August, but September, oh my god September. Update, 28th September 2020, The company wishes to confirm that the rumours of discussions with an undisclosed US company are true and we will update shareholders in due course. 13th October 2020, YGEN announces that the offer of £920m by an undisclosed US company has been accepted.

I must emphasise that nothing within this post is factual. Everything really is a daze, crazy man. DYOR

99% accurate.

Of course you could conclude from that, if the reader knows YGEN is 100% accurate, so would the writer of the article. In which case the article is inaccurate, bordering on being misleading or bias.

Fair point Cooper.

I know they are 99% accurate and so do you, but anyone reading the article does not. In order for YGEN to gain any benefit from articles like this it has to define clearly 80%, 100% etc, or the reader, whoever that might be, automatically assumes the worst, not the best.

Bakky - I thought the article said these companies are inadequate - "inaccuracy of NIPT methods are predicted to restrict the market growth". Is this not saying these companies are inadequate. More to the point, does this not pigeon-hole us within that group with no clear distinction between the best and the worst.

Hi Bakky, interesting article, thanks for that. Can't quite agree with your analysis based upon our inclusion. It seems to me we have been included within a group of companies that are inadequate, and that provide inaccuracies, with no specific dimension given to how far ahead we are in comparison. Unfortunately, this does us no favours at all.

Twix, this is seriously no issue. Cooper quite rightly sought the origin of the AR comment and I gave an answer to the best of my knowledge. Which some how got misconstrued. No hard feelings. i still think your an old git (just joking).

Sorry Twix, I thought you inferred that I deliberately produced the AR comments from thin air. I must have been mistaken.

Thanks for that Masterblaster. I think old Twixy left himself wide open on this one.