We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
"Lets talk what the obligations are for our management. Legally and morally. And are the adhering to both?".
As you know, there are no provisions in the regulations to uphold moral values. On the legal front, my advisor seems to think so and unequivocally, so do I. I suggest you tell us clearly here how you feel the company are falling short on their legal responsibilities? Please refer directly to which statutory obligations you think are not being met, rather than your loose interpretation of these...
I second this. Anyone who needs reminding of the market abuse regulations, and persists with flouting them here, take fair warning from the definitions provided today. They are there to PROTECT genuine shareholders, albeit a minority of posters here.
As for joining in some joint action initiated by Spacdan? I'd sooner stick onions in my ears than trust the motives of said poster.
Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.
That's guff Doc.Dan. You've firmly aligned yourself with the bottom feeders here, defending them ad nauseum even long they outed themselves as SP destroyers that they are. They don't give a tos$ about the company or the drug or the patients who will benefit from it. You can't be a genuinely invested PI AND defend the self-confessed shorters and day traders whose sole aim here is to destroy shareholder confidence. That's where your strategy falls well short, forgive the pun.
I think that's fair, and realistic.
I'm no longer here to do your research Doc.Dan. I dislike your denial of the facts, and your increasingly rude tone to others who are simply here to add to the conversation, so I'm not sure why you think I would want to waste my time providing you with more evidence. We know after 3 years of this charade that you will readily dismiss the facts without a backwards glance. It does not surprise me that you don't remember them. You appear to have very selective recall these days. Anyway, as I said before, it's high time you shoved Mani aside and took control of that Olivetti, re-bob the ribbon, put some diesel in it, and let rip on google. There's plenty of available info on trials and studies being run, all add to greater understanding. I would be very surprised if these aren't informing Synairgen in progressing.
That is why I am happy to wait, knowing a CMO has been hired to push forwards into another, as yet unseen, phase.
No smoke without fire, etc etc.
"anything useful UNIVERSAL throws up". As if it will be some incidental, inconsequential and haphazard bit of nothing data that might elevate the existing mountain of nothing, is that what you are inferring Doc.Dan? Because is sure does seem to be. As always you are screaming for more, yet master of downplaying every positive step the company take. The foolery is not lost. And no, it won't be "in the way" you outlined. It will, with any luck, be much more substantial, critical and and useful to BP, or any other interested parties despite your best efforts here to convince otherwise.
MyIPA, that is incorrect. There have been new findings, relevant respiratory studies done not just abroad but in this country too. Some are still being done. All information available publicly if you dig. The specific costings (end points of Universal) also were not known before it started, but they will be now. Also DO NOT underestimate the data from an observational study. Although randomised controlled trials are the gold standard for evaluating treatment efficacy in patients, due to strict inclusion criteria and conditions required for ascertaining statistical significance, the % of patients included typically represent as little as 5% of the disease population. Therefore observational studies like Universal, because it's focussed on broader patient populations entering hospital with a myriad of medical and respiratory issues, are becoming increasingly important. There is a lot of data that is of interest to BP even from observational studies. That is why they do them. It's not to pass time or for fun. You said "They won't add much to what we already know"; if by "we" you mean Doc.Dan and his cohort, then you are correct. There's not much any of them wish to know because it's not in their interests to seek out the facts.
I encouraged DocDan to do his own research on the current studies happening in NIHR sites around the UK which Synairgen will be interested in for trial design purposes, but the old guffer wasn't up to the task, or couldn't prise Mani's cold claws off the Olivetti. Whichever it was, willful ignorance garners no support nor sympathy here.
The negative trollfest is in part to dissuade further PIs entering here. Nothing to see here. A good sign that there IS something to see here, when it's ready to be revealed, no? But I'm sure you've worked that out already Ghia.
"UNIVERSAL will add its findings, but they won't be much different to what we already know"; that's a willfully misleading statement, and you know it Doc.Dan.
And you also know, or should, that the company are evidencing multiple studies. Universal is but one.
A for effort, D for execution.
As a reminder, this was the September update to shareholders from the company:
Operational
· Progressing the Company's patient identification strategy through biomarker and existing clinical data analysis. This will enable the Company to identify patients at higher risk of disease progression, including those with deficient innate immune response and/or high viral load, who might therefore be more likely to respond to SNG001 in future clinical studies.
· Conducting non-interventional preparatory work to expand hospitalised patient populations for potential treatment with SNG001, which are likely to include: ventilated patients with confirmed viral pneumonia; and patients who are unable to clear virus and become persistent viral "shedders", a majority of whom are immunocompromised. Subject to this preparatory work and regulatory approval timelines, trials are anticipated to start in H1 2024.
· Insights from non-interventional studies and the substantial body of evidence gathered to date from previous clinical trials will inform a robust clinical programme for the development of SNG001.
I would expect to have another update form the company by March, maybe sooner. As I have sad previously, the work of the newly hired CMO is at a critical now, as is the cooperation of the Regulators. The vast swathe of critical pre-trial and pre-launch activities, often being done with other parties, should not be underestimated. Anyone who thinks this is a cake-walk phase that takes a just a few meetings and not much else, should not be invested here, IMO. Those of us who invested with this knowledge, are not perturbed by the silence or the timeframes required.
The mini toe tip trades on the half hour - same tight fisted trader. Return of the bottom feeders. Monday sillies.
It's looking like we're getting warmer. Have a great week all.
"If the directors reached out to a BP tomorrow to offer outright sales talks, the SP would go to £2". No it wouldn't, let's get real here. Those discussions would be watertight. You'd be the last to hear of them. You have no idea who they've been talking to or at what stage they are at in their plans. Thankfully, because if you did, the SP here would have only been ridden into the dust by the trading cowboy posse that has amassed here. Sometimes I am grateful that the company have got absolutely nothing to say, zilch. Until they do.
Now, now Aether, no need to be naughty.
No doubt the similarity you note is down to us being long-term investors here, and as such, interested in facts, science and progress. It appears we are in the minority on this bb.
J&J could still end up being an interested or actual partner, but for this article, I don't see them being the BP in question, for reasons already stated below.
I'm not sure I understand you point about impact of Transcrip's involvement (or cessation?) on the trial timeline?
I don't see them bringing in Mankowski on a whim, to me his appointment was time critical vis-a-vis Synairgen's plan.
Regarding the possibility of J&J "priming it" I can't see how that could ever happen? J&J would be barking mad to pay HVivo millions on the OFF CHANCE that they'd end up with a deal with Synairgen to supply he drug in the first place. You can't just rock up and say I'll pay you now to do challenge trials, without the certainty of actually owning the drug in question. And they can't already own the drug because if they did they'd have been obliged to tell the market that such a deal had happened. So many legal and commercial challenges that would completley rule that out.
Thoughts on Hvivo RSV human challenge trial starting in the second half of 2024; one thought only - it's old news.
Don't see the connection here with us, or the relevance to Synairgen. Did I miss something?
.
Mankowski wasn't pushed out imo. It was a planned move. In April last year Transcrip (Marcin) made a o public announcement that the company had completed full integration of Real Regulatory, a leading regulatory affairs company it acquired in March 2022. If you have been following him on LI, you will see that his departure wasn't sudden, it was actually well lined up. Get the big job done then move on. I suspect he had been in talks with Synairgen much before that, moving when they both felt the time was right for a fulltime CMO. In the heel of the hunt it doesn't matter - we got a very well connected and seasoned CMO in the role.
No. I don't keep mentioning it. But you do.
Glad you have a quiet week ahead. Such times should be cherished.