Member Info for ForFXSake

👍

"but at least I stop their posting"

Is that what you meant to say?

I suppose that could be used as an excuse. I personally thought it to be a reckless choice of communication channel, if true.

If that is the case then it's a pity the company didn't publicly distance itself from those posts. I wonder how many people foolishly bought shares on the back of that 'information' believing it was straight from the horses mouth?

Anyway, funny how we are pointlessly arguing about things the company should have done but have not. Perhaps we should all be focussing on what they have continually announced but still show no evidence of doing. I wonder how those 'discussions' are going? You said they started in October, right? They must be running out of demands by now, surely?

How do you know it was not?

Broken record time:

"We also don’t have orphan status. Every other asset out there has got orphan status already. To compete, I think personally we need that. Ideally from the European vs the US. If we go for European orphan designation, we have to present our existing data and rationale. If it’s accepted, it acts like a badge of honour – independent validation we’ve got potential – so drug companies like it. Plus they get a lot of downstream benefits. Shorter development pathways, R&D spend rebates, etc. So we really need to get that in place I think to close something"

Are those Gooding's words from the Telegram post or not? Basically, Gooding is the company. Why would he say that if he didn't mean it?

To say that we really need to get it to close a deal suggests that it is pretty much critical for a happy ending to this farce..aka Holy Grail.

If they haven't gone for it then what does that mean?

For reference, the conversation about the Telegram meeting took place around 28th Feb.

Just for clarity, this is from the post that kindly transcribed and relayed what was said in the Telegram group. Thanks again to the poster that put it there. I think it's really important.

"5. Dan mentioned 3 aspects they are dealing with, these are his own words:

• Most big pharma, not all, don’t like reprofiling (re-using known drugs). It wouldn’t surprise you if I said we’re speaking with AZ, you don’t have to be a genius to join the dots. They currently love IPF. We know them well. But they don’t like reprofiling. So the IP piece becomed more important, and the deal is just harder overall. We also don’t have orphan status. Every other asset out there has got orphan status already. To compete, I think personally we need that. Ideally from the European vs the US. If we go for European orphan designation, we have to present our existing data and rationale. If it’s accepted, it acts like a badge of honour – independent validation we’ve got potential – so drug companies like it. Plus they get a lot of downstream benefits. Shorter development pathways, R&D spend rebates, etc. So we really need to get that in place I think to close something. It will take up to 3 months to get orphan status. We want to start immediately."

I'm not going bang on about this anymore. I just want people to remember what was said just before we got hit with the last fundraiser. We want to see progress being made and words being kept.

Correct? Which part exactly? Was it this: "you were the one who said the 90 day period was up"?

I think I also added: "Not sure if the deadline expires exactly on the 90 day mark or if there is some special meeting to confirm whether or not the product met the requirements."

Yes I pointed out that we were 90 days past 27th March. But that was the date that the eternal apologists were banging on about as being the likely date for submission because, back then, it was still in the future. First it was 60 days that we would have to wait. When that looked like it would slip it became 90 days. Now were past 90 days, the apologists are getting cranky again.

Or perhaps this part was correct:

"Has it ever occurred to you that they haven’t submitted?

Does a company have to announce when they’ve not done something that they haven’t announced they would do?"

I seem to remember a post on here relaying what had been said in a certain telegram meeting. Something about applying for orphan status being critical to securing a deal because all our competition were in the process of applying (or something along those lines)?

Did I not read that? Older, if you're reading this then perhaps you can correct me if I misead it. If that was factually correct though then why would the company not go ahead and do it?

Oh I see, so failure of the company to communicate has driven you back to 'let's blame the other posters' mode

Basically you've always got an excuse for nothing happened. We don't even know if they have submitted

Ask the company Soup

Trombone has, I believe.

When I say submission, I mean the date when the review starts (27th March).

Of course, if the company chose to be more transparent about it then we wouldn't all be guessing, would we?

I thought the assessment was normally done within 60 days of submission. If a decision couldn't be reached within that time frame then a further 30 day period was allowed for final deliberation.

That's only what I've picked up from here though.

Is that directed at me?

I am not Aim4Utopia. Nor am I NFT...nor anyone else for that matter.

Report away.

That was it folks! Exactly 90 days from March 27th.

Not sure if the deadline expires exactly on the 90 day mark or if there is some special meeting to confirm whether or not the product met the requirements.

However, as always with this company..no news is bad news and it's pretty poor that they can't even be bothered to confirm if and when a submission was made.

Then the dream is still alive Robbo :0)

We are No1!

If it works out I'll send a years supply of specials NFT

Well thanks NFT's. I guess that's my hopes and dreams down the toilet.

I was looking forward to a bumper deal so I could finally wind down, perhaps open a little cafe in the country. Had it all planned out, name and logo:

-- The Dirty Samosa: As far as hygiene ratings go

Jiving, I understand what you're saying but if the discussions started back in October then the importance of orphan status must have been made clear to them early on. They would have had plenty of opportunity to get the ball rolling.

They were obviously prepared for the normal EU patent submission, surely the application for orphan status is just an extension of the work already done for that.

Every extra moment of delay is an opportunity for partners to change their mind and walk away. They must surely understand that. I therefore believe that they have had every opportunity to get that submission in for March and stand by what I said.

We're at a point now where I guess we're about to found out how genuine these 'partnering' discussions have been.

Last week we got what appeared to be a well-timed RNS detailing bundled news about several patent updates. In light of the fact that we are rapidly approaching the 90 day deadline for orphan reviews submitted in March, I initially thought this might actually be a coordinated attempt to get their ducks lined-up. It felt like it might be the pre-cursor to an orphan status announcement that could finally close a deal following the already drawn out 'discussions' that have been going on for the last 9-10 months.

If we get that announcement before the end of next week then we will know that the board have been working hard to deliver this as early as possible, to show the partners they are serious about a deal before they hit more financial trouble.

If they don't then we can only assume that there are either no partner discussions underway at all or that the 'partner' in question is happy to wait months for an outcome. That probably means they have already made their decision and are happy to draw this out to get as much progress as possible done at our expense before taking it private on the cheap. It would also mean our board are happy with that outcome and don't care about the risks of having to find more money.

Let's hope the patent RNS was well-timed to boost an orphan status announcement, rather than just being another cynical move to mitigate any damage to confidence that the HY results RNS could have caused.