Member Info for Joshholdforgold

I believe Adam added enough to maintain the same % of the company after dilution so there won’t be an RNS.

With SO FINALLY out a significant re-rate must be on the cards.

All those who bought the dip will be rewarded as this starts to become a popular recovery play. Nothing has fundamentally changed since the placement at £1.10.

A bag from todays prices seems likely and fast.

Just look at avct. 40p to £1.35 in a couple of weeks. I would not be at all surprised to see something similar here.

GLA

Thanks! It was certainly a lesson on putting all your eggs in one basket.

https://twitter.com/joshblakemore8/status/1511612605680476166?s=21&t=O8VNtP93uPCwe7AUfkNxaQ

I am expecting to get some real confidence from Suzy and looking forward to hearing how things other than 201 are are progressing.

Technically poised for a move up too.

Bought a nice fat chunk at 41p this morning. I forecast that we will finish blue today.

This morning’s fall was unsubstantiated and down to a few bedwetters who are now out.

GLA

Yesterday we had the highest volume traded on DDDD ever. Who bought all those shares? Merck? We will find out today or tomorrow.

Good luck all. This share was cheap at 70p let alone 30p

You have been added to the chat by pmjh. You should see it when you log in.

ATB

Matterhorn - Are you on Reddit? If so connect with me. Same username. I did maths and statistics at university and could probably work this out if we can find out a bit more about what data model they use.

The data evaluation of the 17% who did not have corticosteroids is key.

If the 83 patients show trends matching P2 then the dream is very much still alive. That is a big IF.

But currently enterprise value of c£15m makes it worth holding to find out surely.

Dumbpunter and scinv - I genuinely do not understand you. You have trolled this board for over a year. Neither of you are thick. But why put so much effort into a share you don’t hold? It baffles me.

Almost bang on!

I too have been wondering about how polygon will play the next stages.

Let’s assume the results are fantastic. Mirroring P2. I think we could see £7 on results.

Would polygon

A) Buy into the rise (pushing us higher).
B) HODL for EUA and TO or big contracts.
C) Sell into the rise to de-risk?

My gut feeling is they are prepared to take high risk for high returns.

As far as I can tell, they own too much of the company to sell now. I think they are in for the long hall.

It wouldn’t make sense to build such a big stake to plan to sell out.

It’s been clearly stated that long covid endpoints would be reported on at a later date and would not be included in the initial read out.

De-ramp grade F - simply not good enough. See the teacher after class.

But it won’t stand in the way of an EUA.

I don’t disagree that there will be a place for that with SNG too.

Please can you occupy Sang over here on DDDD.

The waiting for 5018 has got to him and he is making a nuisance of himself on the SNG board.

Come on sang focus your energy on explaining to everyone how biomarkers could streamline approval process. I know that’s your favourite subject.

Having had childhood asthma in the 90s and 00's I can personally vouch for the gap in the market for new treatments. These results, while only taken from a small sample are hugely encouraging. If such performance can be replicated in Part B then this will prove to be an industry disruptor.

I am glad to see the share price moving in the right direction for a change. Lets hope for some more juice at 1pm.

GLA!

In the Rock Paper Scissors of Synairgen, Omicron and Boris Govt.

Synairgen smashes Omicron
Omicron embarrasses Boris’ Govt
Boris govt ****s on Synairgen.

Hi Matterhorn.

The bit on statistical significance isn't quite right.

In a nutshell, the p-value is the probability that the results were a fluke. In this case 0.05. The 95% significance level is asking the question, if the trial was repeated 100 times, would you draw the same conclusion at least 95 times?

You do not need 95% of the sample to show improvement to be 95% confident that the data is not a fluke. You could for example be 95% confident that 20% of the sample would show improvement.

The smaller the % of the population showing improvement, the larger the sample needed for it to be statistically significant.

Take the flip of a coin:

n=number of flips h=heads t=tails.

n=2 t=0 h=2 Would not be statistically significant at the 95% level to say that heads and tails had different probabilities. The probability of this event is 0.25 (>p=0.05).

However,

n=1000 t=600 h=400 would be statistically significant. You would be able conclude that tails was more likely than heads given a 95% significance level. (I haven't worked out the exact probability of 600 or more tails out of 1000 tosses, but trust me it will be very small. Much less than 0.05).