Member Info for GlenFidrich

Yikes! Even for the long termers, this is becoming painful. Nearly all my profit from the 10p days (old money) has evaporated. But, it's days like today that help to reinforce why I still hold. Today, so far reported, we have roughly (let's be generous) 150,000 shares traded (not all sells, by the way). This is a company with 68 million shares in issue. Let that sink in... Yet, less than 0.25% of shares in issue have been exchanged, while we have been marked down 8.82%! This feels like a final attempt to squeeze any remaining shares out of the weak hands. I've fallen for it in the past, so I'm kind of familiar with the feeling. This time, however, I'm not fooled, but the big question is: Are you?

Thanks potnak and Gunner68. The AGILE angle I wish they had kept us updated about. It was such an opportunity, but nobody ran with it, sadly. The secret patent being about the capsule formulation I had forgotten about, so thanks for the reminder. All best everyone.

I was just trying to find when/where mention was made of the so-called "secret patent", but to no avail. I seem to remember JR saying something like, "the whole world will know soon enough about this". I can't remember when, or where, this was said. Can anyone point me in the right direction? I'm pretty sure it was last year... Another thought. If our SDC 1801 was better than, or equal to, baricitinib (in treating the symptoms of Covid-19, as per the RNS 1/7/2021) what on earth is going on?? There was talk of fast-tracking SDC 1801 via AGILE, yet we can't seem to get approval for a CTA?? Something just doesn't add up here, or am I completely barking? Anyone care to set me straight? Thx in advance.

...that the Board could defuse all the speculation would be to buy some shares on the open market, whilst awaiting news regarding the CTA. This would help to restore confidence, send the message that all is not lost, buoy the sp (kind of most importantly from a personal perspective!), and perhaps urinate on the conflagration that they themselves, if we're honest, have started. Unless, of course, they're privy to information which precludes them from buying? I know nothing about a closed period, nor whether they might buy or not (except I've seen it work in the past - witness SP's buy last year), but it would certainly help to alleviate the concerns that many have - at least, apparently, on this bulletin board. Again, I wish everyone all best, and urge patience. Let's respect each other's views, and refrain from the vitriol please.

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/investing/article-11471939/MIDAS-SHARE-TIPS-life-sciences-start-wealth-booster.html?ico=mol_desktop_money-newtab&molReferrerUrl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fmoney%2Findex.html&_ga=2.261764557.1739495891.1669545659-1809660832.1607947364
This last year has clearly been a disaster for the SAR sp, but we're not alone (look at OXB). And, the tide may be turning... Here's hoping, and here's urging everyone to keep the faith! All best.

No apology required, shepster. I must have got my wires crossed! That dashed CTA RNS has certainly put the cat among the pigeons and left everyone scrambling for possible explanations. Quite unforgivable of the Board to leave everyone hanging like this, although I'm still hopeful for a positive outcome in due course. Good luck to one and all.

shepster, I wholeheartedly agree with you, and I, too, have asked the very same questions which hopefully someone will address at the agm. I know that my post was highly speculative, but surely the RNS pertaining to the CTA delay left so many questions unanswered that it invited the kind of speculation that I apparently am guilty of, and that you seem to shun?

https://www.appliedclinicaltrialsonline.com/view/understanding-project-optimus
Still trying to figure out what might have caused the delay to our CTA. The article above may shed some light? I'm aware the focus of the article is on new dose optimization expectations for oncology drugs (and therefore perhaps more relevant for SDC 1802) but some of the same issues may arise with our SDC 1801 application? From the article: "Most importantly, the classical drug development paradigm does not adequately characterize long-term toxicity. This oversight is problematic, as patients on new biological therapies are expected to undergo treatment for much longer periods of time. Patients may use targeted drugs for months or years, which increases the importance of evaluating long-term tolerability." I think understanding the potential pitfalls and obstacles when navigating through clinical trials is important in helping people manage their expectations. Just my Saturday morning reflection.

1) The significance of today's RNS is surely that this is the first "peer-reviewed" publication of clinical data using SRA737, and by peer-reviewed we mean "subjecting an author's scholarly work, research, or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field (peers)" and which is considered "necessary to ensure academic scientific quality". This is therefore not insignificant, or am I missing something?
2) Regarding the share price action today, who, pray, is making money? Not the traders, since to buy now you'll be quoted 85p, and to sell this morning you would have been quoted 85p! There's no margin, hence why we get the '50p brigade' desperate to drive the price lower so that they can buy on the cheap, and make their beer money for the week. It was obvious the rise this morning had no legs (Utah, you don't need a crystal ball for that!) because there was no volume. BUT, equally, the drop this afternoon has no credibility, as, again, volume is minuscule. So, who benefits? Well the mms, obviously, who sold at 90p this morning, and who will buy your shares at 80p this afternoon, making their 10% as they go (which is pretty much their daily modus operandi). Meanwhile, the bb becomes a toxic portal for all and sundry to vent their frustration. If you see through the deceit and misdirection, we might be happier to hold and wait for real news. Just a thought...

Utah, let's perhaps get our facts right? Sareum announced the PROPOSED acquisition of Sierra Oncology by GSK on the 13th April, 2022. It was made clear at that time that "the key driver of the acquisition was momelotinib". It was also noted that the transaction was "expected to close in the third quarter of 2022 or before". Now, forgive me if I'm wrong, but to suggest GSK "turned it [SRA 737] down" is complete tosh. We're not even sure GSK were aware of SRA 737 - their focus was clearly momelotinib - but do you seriously think that, given the timeframes, GSK would have had the time to investigate SRA 737 thoroughly and subsequently to decide they would pass? I think a much more likely sequence of events would be:
1) Licence renegotiated (November 2020) but with date deadlines included (TM stating at the time, "we are confident that this amendment will expedite the advancement of the SRA737 programme in a timely manner"). In other words, the message to SO was 'progress SRA 737 within a given timeframe, or hand it back'.
2) Once SO was acquired by GSK, Sareum's TM, Michael Owen, and Harry Finch ( who sits on the scientific advisory board) - each of whom are ex-employees of GSK and no doubt well-connected with their former colleagues - might well have used their influence to persuade GSK to hand back SRA 737 "in a timely manner".
Thus, I would argue your contention that GSK "turned down" SRA 737 is mischievous in the extreme, and ill-thought through.

Less than 100,000 shares traded so far (less than 0.2% of shares in issue), and we're down 8.33%? Seriously? Hardly a stampede for the exit. Hold tight. Often, in these apparent capitulations, the sp rebounds strongly. Just my take, based on previous such price action.

A really thought-provoking post, tacet. Reminds me of the old adage - know your history, and you can predict the future. UFO's future, for me at least, remains bright, but geopolitical factors are at play which might still impact. Hopefully, calm heads will prevail.

"Non-clinical data is research data generated from in vitro laboratory studies and from in vivo studies in animals. The data help characterize the important pharmacokinetic (what the body does to the drug) and pharmacodynamic (what the drug does to the body) features of a medicinal product. Non-clinical data is also used to help predict the expected toxicity profile and this is of paramount importance for first-in-man studies. In such cases, assessment of non-clinical data influences the decision to proceed with a clinical trial.
Clinical data often supersedes non-clinical data during the later stages of the development programme of a new medicinal product. However, some characteristics of a medicinal product cannot be ethically researched in humans (reproductive toxicity, carcinogenic potential, and genotoxicity). For regulatory submissions, a detailed non-clinical overview must be included in Module 2 of the dossier. The overview will include reference to GLP compliance and detailed description of the experimental systems, results, and overall conclusions." [Source: https://academic.oup.com/book/25167/chapter-abstract/191680175?redirectedFrom=fulltext]
Just wondering if the issue is with MTD and thus the "expected toxicity profile"? Hard to predict if you can't determine the maximum tolerated dose.

...was hugely positive, with board members buying a total of 39,346,288 shares between them. Always good to see the directors having an ever increasing stake in the business. However, that leaves a whopping 103,653,712 shares at 0.35p sold to "existing shareholders". Who are these "existing shareholders" pray, and what is stopping them dumping their shares on the open market so as to realize an instant 20-30% profit? I'm comfortable with my investment here, but it does seem blindingly obvious that the sp will drift down to near, or at, the 0.35p level until the overhang has been mopped up, or until we learn of more progress (which might buoy the sp somewhat). That's fine by me - I have funds spare to add should the sp hit such levels - but it's going to feel like death by a thousand cuts in the interim, or am I missing something? Please don't think I'm deramping - I'm very bullish for the medium to long term here - but just see some short term headwinds for the sp, is all.

ForrestGump, happily you weren't wrong about Apple all those years ago! Lightning can strike twice! Fingers crossed.

...how my filters are on, yet I've seen no indication that those I have filtered have posted since we turned blue! How strange.

Are the Comex and LBMA faltering? Is the derivative market finally unravelling? We keep seeing these wild swings on the commodities markets which must surely be an indication of instability. Weird times, indeed.

The price of precious metals is strongly correlated to the strength (or otherwise) of the USD - strong $, weak metals (and vice versa). As I mentioned yesterday, $18-$19 per ounce silver represents bargain basement time as that is pretty much what it's costing these days to mine the stuff (AISCs). Given the continued drain of physical silver from the Comex and LBMA, and the high demand (witnessed by the high premiums being charged for silver and gold bullion), personally I foresee a dramatic increase in the price of silver over the next two years, or so, something akin to the rally that occurred between 2009 and 2011 (when silver went from $10 per ounce to around $50). This is why, when I read of "bonanza silver" at EH, I see potential here, but patience will be the order of the day I'm afraid.

A balanced assessment, picax. I'm also bullish on silver and PGMs. Could RM's apparent indifference to EH be that, with silver spot at around $19 and change, it's simply not financially viable to mine it - yet? I mean, there are currently plenty of silver producers struggling to keep AISCs sufficiently below spot to be able to generate a profit. Once silver spot takes off (as demand outstrips supply) that could all change quite quickly. Meanwhile, Munni Munni just offers richer pickings, that's all? Nothing to see here, let's move on, no red flags - or is that just wishful thinking on my part?

I guess one becomes a multi-millionaire by doing your due diligence and remaining steadfast in your investment rationale. What would be absolute lunacy would be to base your investment decisions on what one reads of chat forums such as this. By the way, in Berkshire Hathaway's history, there have been no less than three times when the fund was down 50%. The trick, I deduce from this, is not to panic when things are seemingly bleak. GLA.