RE: When you look at the trials14 Feb 2019 20:50
Ivy, therein lies the problem. Surely the FDA correspondence outlines what’s needed. They are there to help afterall. Or do they send cryptic responses?
Maybe so, as there will be a meeting.
We’re talking very precise albeit statistical stuff. Why the total lack of details re this in the RNS.
Why mention cash raise before meeting? ESP as ok into Q2 . And no value mentioned. Critical. 5m v 50m is massive. No indication
If they know more trials , why not state it. ?
RNS are supposed to be informative, this one was very disinformative and looks like your Nomad and broker were overridden - cause they wouldn’t be so downbeat.
So why, after some peeps decades of work, would you write such a RNS which looked designed to F off your substantail holders. And in such a short time. - all very calculated. I mean, how many cos say they need a raise without an explicit ( not inferred) reason ?
Who did GL work for before. Merck ?
There are smoke and naughty mirrors at play here , think of the prize. Time doesn’t matter to the peeps who pull the strings.