Member Info for Ghia

It was the science that first compelled me to invest here but looking down through my notes the standout piece of information that fills me with confidence is the appointment of an interim CFO.

I don’t see why you’d make that appointment if you had just received bad trial data.

Mr Big - Well clearly there is one product.

Emotions are running high because many had hoped for news sooner. The sideways lull in the share price doesn’t help either.

Have a good weekend.

Mr Big - Why is it a problem that SNG excluding it’s other small interests are solely focused on Inhaled IFN-b?

They are a small biotech that over the years has targeted this therapy as the one with legs.

They are now heading towards the end of the program at pace.

I’d rather the company had a single focus than multiple distractions.

You’d also do well to realise the confidence they have that SNG001 will soon belong to someone else. They actively started to look for and engage in new partnerships to leverage their bio bank very recently a sign they are ready to move onto the next project now that the job is nearly done on SNG001.

Scinv - Surely as a scientist you know that the science is never 100% conclusive there are always confidence intervals. There is still more to figure out about the world around us than what we have already worked out.

Of course there is risk without risk there would be no money to be made.

You talk as if you know all the answers and that RM&co are idiots for pursuing this treatment.

If that is the case write your paper and publish it for peer review and save everyone time and money.

Curious to know your opinion on Holgate, you are obviously not a fan of RM.

For me it was interesting to watch Holgate switch his vocabulary from we hope, we predict, we theorise to ‘We Know’

That is significant for a man of his caliber he is very precise with his words.

Scinv - That was a conversation about RISK where I clearly stated the biggest risk to the company is that it does not achieve approval for the drug. I was not going to provide the exhaustive list of factors that would lead to that outcome, there's no point the result is the same.

I then challenged you to find me a scientific publication that showed that IFN will not work for Covid. It was a bit of an unfair challenge since none of the IFN studies which would have enough data to make a clear cut statistically significant result have completed yet. Oh and 3 of them are our own studies.

The paper you are discussing which lets be clear you didn't even post to the board is a piece in the puzzle to understanding the bigger picture here, in isolation it means nothing when combined with research that is ongoing it might help targeted therapies.

Remember operation DRAGON? I doubt you where here when that was being discussed the data being collected globally will shape the way we can target therapeutics to patients you seem under the impression that Synairgen are oblivious to this and are running blind into their trials.

Scinv - I’ve not discussed neutralising antibodies or autoimmunity in detail here. So how could you possibly know my opinion on that matter?

Keep to the facts please.

Scinv - Whilst the discussion here is interesting it’s nothing I haven’t heard before from a number of sources.

I hope you feel better for having got off your chest what you wanted to say.

But you spoilt it with your last comment. Perhaps a bit of humility and modesty would help you get along better in social situations.

Scinv - Yes but not everyone is going to understand the statement you are referencing if you expect people to join the discussion you have to break it down to a level they will understand.

Or move the discussion to a board which has a cohort of people who are happy to discuss and debate the science in this level of detail.

LSE once had this level of discussion but sadly the petty games and trolls ****ed us off too much so the discussion now happens elsewhere.

Scinv - I think you are preaching to the wrong audience join one of the other forums and the science will be debated in detail on both sides of the argument.

I don’t understand why you are against joining them, if you truly want to discuss the science.

big-blue - To counter your argument. The pandemic has been really difficult for my team, we sell large engineering test equipment globally. 95% of our trade is overseas predominantly ASIA.

During lockdown we had 20million pounds worth of equipment in shipping crates at sites waiting to be installed.

We normally fly a team of 10-15 engineers out to install, commission and train. We battled to try and get permissions to fly we explored routes into countries, we contemplated paying staff to quarantine in dubai before moving onto their final destination. Eventual we gave up with the idea of flying out a team.

The pandemic forced us to get creative and we invested in building up competency locally, it was a painful journey but now those markets are self sufficient it actually costs us less to install machines. The pandemic forced us to make a painful step we won't be flying as much as we used to after the pandemic.

I'm sure this story will be similar for other companies and industries, who have had to adjust to get by.

I'm not saying people won't fly again but the picture will be a bit different IAG should do fine but some airlines may be a shell of their former self in the future.

I'm looking forward to holidaying abroad again.

SeaBoy - excellent post, did you notice they have released the job advert for the task force lead?

The key takeaway from the advert is they are looking for 2 drugs to be available in time for the autumn winter virus season but they are also tasking the lead with developing a pipeline of drugs that will come on stream in 2022.

Purely based on progress through trials we stand a good chance of being in the running for one of the early treatments, even if in the future the pipeline of additional treatments eat away at our share of the pie which is always inevitable.

That pill that comes in spray form... Classic case of reading too much into the words of a politician, Pill will morph into whatever delivery mechanism gives results and allows them to claim we are winning the fight in preventing future lockdowns.

Based on number of trial sites anticipated they are looking to average 5 per site.

Once the majority are up and running it should complete quickly.

The absence of Germany is interesting perhaps they’ve deemed the infection rates are not high enough there and they will fill the trial in Europe without them.

40 odd patient target in Italy across 10sites that should be fairly easy to fill for them.

Scinv - Your argument again has drifted away from does SNG work to what if there are other treatments.

It matters not what others do the market is massive and we just need a slice of it.

Scinv let’s talk risk then.

What the biggest risk to SNG? it fails to receive approval for its drug completely.

This risk is independent of Covid, independent of competitors etc.

It relies primarily on the outcome of the Global Pivotal P3 trial.

Now I challenge you to find one scientific publication that indicates IFN will not provide a benefit in this trial situation.

All information I can find and prior trial data suggests it stands an amazingly good chance of reaching the primary targets and thus approval.

If SNG receive approval for their drug the share price will not be in the £1.40’s

This is how I view the risk and if you are prepared to wait it out it’s a no brainer.

If however you can’t wait 2seconds for the next news to land you might as well not invest in biotech.

Scinv - All this from someone who thinks ii's cannot hold shares in SNG without appearing on the companies investors page...

You obviously do not like the way RM has navigated the pandemic.

Yet as an investor he has returned in excess of 8x gains on todays price.

He is close to delivering 3 P2 trials and one P3 trial in less than 18months.

The list goes on ref the good things he has done to drive the company forward yet all you can do is focus on what you perceive are negatives.

On the whole there is a massive net positive here and the share price reflects that.

Scinv - Last year the company was certainly not in a position to take pre-orders or convince a regulatory authority that they could deliver drug to market. RM himself made that very clear in his interviews.

Since then they have taken the following steps:

-Brought Clinigen in as a partner to satisfy the regulatory requirements which would have blocked EUA or Approval.
-Raised funds for scale up activities
-Sorted out their supply chain partnerships
-Recruited 3 permanent positions to replace contractors working on the regulatory aspects of the supply chain

The SNG now is a hole different beast to the SNG last year they have done some maturing very quickly the only blocker for them now is the quantity of data. The number of live trials will address that.

If the concerned posters spent half as much time researching SNG as they did on every other development drug out there they might spot the obvious.

Here’s a question for you why is there so much spilt milk over the recovery trial debacle? Perhaps Oxford are missing out on delivering the crown jewel to the world.

Let’s let the data do the talking and we can debate who is right afterwards.

Andrew - You do realise that list is just working from number of posts.

Don’t get drawn in about the guff about AI and deciphering post content.