Member Info for Fruitsnveg

And he saith unto them, Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith? Then he arose, and rebuked the winds and the sea; and there was a great calm.

"There are a few signs floating about which are interesting when considered objectively and not emotionally. TW's activities for me are quite telling. To be clear I'm not suggesting cash issues, but are things progressing at an acceptable rate or are people moving onto new projects."

What actions (of TW) are those Ghia?

MrCosts version would be "Play Marsden for Me"...Lol!

I hope you gave them a piece of your mind Mr Costs.

You might be on to something there Doc83.

Don't forget your calcs!

Removing posts you don't like or that don't fit your MO is more your style than mine, DocDan.

Have a word with the Admin, I'm sure he'll oblige. I'll just keep posting factual things and the odd opinion in response to blatant disinformation. I've lead the horses to water, their choice if they drink from the well of knowledge or wither away from factual dehydration...

Yawn DocDan. You seem to be happiest when you are sparring over dinosaur bones. I've given you all you need - now play with it or throw it away.

" TFG actually have been sat here for 2yrs hoping like the rest of us this comes good, with no hedge/insurance in place." If that's true, then what does a hedge fund do, if not hedge? If they didn't use hedging strategies they would simply be called Investment Houses.

Again, I point back to the Annual Report which we know contains fact, not opinions;

Event driven equities accounts for just 18% of TFG's overall investments. (Tetragon invests in event-driven equities and convertible bonds primarily through hedge funds managed by Westbourne River Partners and Acasta Partners.).

Below is the breakdown -SNG, as far as we know (per TFG's comms when Polygon became Acasta) sits in a fund managed by Acasta. The totality of Acasta's investments accounts for less than 4% of TFG's whole investment pot. Break that down further into their managed funds , and then holdings, and hopefully you start to see what a risibly low figure we are talking about, in context of their overall business. No way are they struggling/stuck/in over their heads/drowning/underwater or whatever other term you try to make stick here. They are savvy, loaded and appear to still be engaged in their long-term plan, whatever that might be.

4.5% Westbourne River Event Fund - Long Bias

3.7% Acasta funds

0.8% Other hedge fund

Doc83, there should be no pre-requisite to you coming back with your calcs. But to answer your question, their "hedge" could be any number of iterations of a typical HF long/short strategy. For a edge fund that is their MO, it's a given, their bread and butter. They have many financial instruments at their disposal. They could have a long position here and a short position elsewhere of equal magnitude, different magnitude or a lot more elaborate. If you have the money and the skill and your horizon is long, you de-risk. And they have a shed load more money than all of us combined. If they just bought shares and sat on them like us PI's, they'd not make consistent returns for their shareholders.

DocDan, I think Doc83 can speak for himself. You don't need to step in and shield everyone constantly with your usual rancour. I think they are perfectly capable of occupying this "debating chamber" without clutching at your petticoats for help.

Ref the annual report, I told you where you can find it. Go use google and read.

Dippfs, what 'Bio fund'? They don't have a 'Bio Fund'.

Looking forward to your calcs Doc83.

Doc83, I do know what I'm talking about and yes, it is a common hedge fund strategy. No amount of naysaying can alter that fact.

Very happy for you to post your full calculations from TR1's here?

In the absence of that, I must rely on TFG's own report, which, I would assume is well vetted before publication to shareholders.

Yes Doc83, it’s a common hedge fund investment strategy! You think they’ve been sitting here for 2 years dawdling like the rest of us? No chance.

Annual report shows how much they are under for each fund - it’s a lot less than touted here for either of the applicable funds. It’s also not a loss until they sell. And they haven’t sold. ‘Underwater’ means nothing when they still have skin in the game. It’s nothing more than pit stop from A to B, albeit via a detoured route!

There is zero evidence to back up the "their average in price is c.£1" Doc83, and there never has been. Fund performance in their most recent annual report indicates they have done fine in the past year. They are savvy enough to weather this storm out on a long and a short boat concurrently, like other hedge funds do. Claims of a high average have always been exploited here to make TFG look like green-horned incompetents stuck in a bad bet. That couldn't be further from the truth.

As for"we'll take anything now as there's no alternative" - that is merely a matter of opinion.

You lack imagination DocDan. You need to think outside the box, just a little.

Pause and repeat for those in the back; I see a deal, funding, a mutually beneficial partnership and a de-risked path to drug approval. No mention of JV, got the wrong guy again there. NDAs in place while DD is being done.

I'm either right, or I'm wrong. We'll find out soon enough.

If there is a deal afoot you won't have communication while due diligence NDAs are in place. As you all well know! Making up such blatant drivel does not help your case. It just highlights the obvious antics at play here.