Member Info for hold4results

You said the deal failed. The deal was to run a trial in asthma exacerbations, which the company did. It did not fail, it was agreed, signed, paid for. Sadly it did not progress beyond results. The chances of success pre P2 are always low. All of this is normal. If you're attacking a drug discovery company for a drug not meeting trial endpoints, I'm not sure how you expect drug discovery to work?

TBH I'm now quite suspicious of your intentions here.

Incidentally that deal was done before there were even P2 results, at a stage with much higher risk.
It's a world away from a completed P3 trial and an approved drug, still 100% owned by the company.

The deal did go through, the company received an initial $7M and I believe some milestone payments. The licence was later handed back, as is quite common with deals done before results. Please stop this.

The company has never said £21 per dose, you took that from a video by Campbell who just looked up the cost of Rebif.
Rebif is not the product we're discussing here - subcutaenous inteferon beta has been tried and it doesn't work.
Please stick to facts scinv, you're not being at all fair.

I'm not up for a weekend of arguing this but I will just point out that company does, in fact, have a proven track record of signing a major deal with big pharma in recent history. That licence was handed back, in my view because at that point there was no capability to quickly test for viruses in the trial and the target patient population in asthma had a much lower rate of viral exacerbations than expected.

The company has shown it is quite capable of striking a major deal with big pharma, and big pharma has shown confidence in the strength of the IP.

Who would cross the bridge of death must answer me these questions three!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZJZK6rzjns

Dudio - I'd probably be more open to it if it wasn't a barrage of negative posts in the last hour of trade on a Friday. I also don't think he has backed it up, he's just insisted the placing money will sell at breakeven and given some very poor reasoning as to why. It's deramping, IMHO

Not the only account from 2013. They delete all their posts and recycle the accounts.

Acacia had no interest in the company whatsoever, they bought a portfolio at an obscene discount and sold it for quick profit.
If your smart financiers got in at £1.75 for a quick flip with low risk they weren't very smart after all, were they?

If a particular fund's investment guidelines prevent them taking the risk involved in a trial result, that fund would not invest in placings raised specifically to fund a trial. The job of a fund manager is to take calculated risk. In polite terms this person is talking guff.

Yeah, hop it, shorty

I don't believe you're seriously suggesting that our trial news is the only factor affecting the SP so here's Bill Oddy doing the Funky Gibbon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAmx_XdQky8

We've achieved 2 key milestones in the last 10 days. I think it's a bit early to suggest the SP is going nowhere without news.

I guess eventually patients will get their genome sequenced as a matter of course, and all interferon deficiencies can be corrected, or at least boosted when necessary, for the rest of their lives.

We have been over this over and over.
If you think the BetterLife CEO is right, sell your shares here and invest in BetterLife.

In the small print at the bottom:
"For current services performed FNM has been compensated twenty six hundred dollars for news coverage of the current press releases issued by BetterLife Pharma Inc by a non-affiliated third party. "

You could always add to the reddit, but I reckon the more the merrier if the info is good :)

Very interesting, thanks.

My advice to Telegraph readers is to stop waving your Johnson at us.

LUCKY PANTS
LUCKY PANTS