Member Info for Krustysmegma

For those LTH's who are excited at the prospect of £3, why didn't you take it when it was available, just over two years ago? Simple question? You sat there and waited (ten, twelve, fourteen or more years in some cases...) and then £3 came along, why didn't you sell?

Think you need to look back at the late April posts on here again silverknight. The £33 million is the annual target, not the interim. So just shy of 50p split between the two payment dates, if they're on target.

40pps?? I wish! I've pencilled in 20-25p interim, final c. 30p. Hope you're right though, we'll find out on Wednesday. XD 12 Sept, payment date 11th Oct.

Thanks Lazarus. I understand the principle of non-dilutive funding (as you say, monies received with no shares issued), but it's harder to nail down how it would work. As you say, a licence deal would have the effect of bringing cash into the business, but only at the expense of trading IP. So money up front, potential for milestone payments, royalties etc. but then the "asset" (1801 or whatever) would belong to a third party - isn't that still dilution? I'm playing devils advocate with this really, I know this is the business that SAR is in and unless we take any of these compounds through to market then licencing is the business model, I'm just not sure what constitutes "non-dilutive" longer term for shareholders.

Thanks again Laz, hopefully my brain is now fully warmed ready for another week on Planet SAR with no more daft questions! Great RNS this morning, I particularly liked the "We remain motivated in progressing SDC-1801 through clinical development" comment from John Reader, for those who still think SAR is not in the business of developing compounds through clinical stages. That's now clear and unequivocal.

Could someone explain what is meant by "non-dilutive funding"? I keep reading about it on these pages. Is it a loan against the IP of the company rather than the assets? Or a partnership with another organisation that is prepared to take forward clinical-stage development without receiving shares in the company in return? I'm not sure how any of these options can genuinely be non-dilutive in the true sense?

More likely a reaction to the London block of flats fire and renewed concern about the cost of remedial works for cladding removal.

Pandamonia, overdone reaction to the London tower block fire and the resurrection of cladding reparation cost fears. All the builders are heavily down today.

It's all smoke & mirrors Naz. Nothing has changed. On Wednesday they put through an A trade at the full ask to make it look like the price had suddenly risen sharply. Today they're putting through A trades at the bid price so it looks like there's been a sell-off.

Hmm, 6.88p dividend after WHT. That's pretty grim. The only thing that made this share worth taking a risk on fossil fuel public enemy number one was the prospect of double-figure returns on investment. Now that's gone there's really no point being here any more IMHO.

#from not form

Guitarsolo, this form the Circular which should allay your fears somewhat:

"1. the Investment Manager shall not be entitled to receive any performance fee unless both the High Water Mark Condition and the Investment Hurdle Condition are met, each of which is defined below; and

2. any performance fees will only then be paid to the Investment Manager concurrent, and on a pro rata basis, with amounts being distributed to Shareholders, with performance fees in effect being paid out of realised returns only."

In effect, they're aligning the performance fee for management of the winddown with the amount recovered for shareholders, which should help deliver a win/win for shareholders and the Investment Manager. That's the theory at least, of course it remains to be seen what will actually happen.

Big sell-off of US tech shares has impacted the lead tech Trust (PCT). Hopefully see some recovery from here.

Yes XD today mjh, 3.2p as you say.

Thank you!

Pity the only drill they can afford is a Black & Decker.

Excellent update ahead of the September 10th interims announcement. Plenty to look forward to here.

No need to apologise sog, your posts are informative and valued. I've said before (on several occasions) my biggest fear is that the company, at this relatively late stage, is vulnerable to a lowball takeout. That would mean long-term holders here, of which there are many, not seeing the true value of their investment. That's my only agenda.

...this morning which is usually a signal for me to think about topping up. However, we've gone from having a clearly-visible dividend supported by a sound strategy to a position where nobody knows or can predict what the return might be for investors. On that basis I won't be adding.

...errr, stock market crash? 12% wiped off Asia last night?

"Of 1.5 billion take a 10% pessimistic offer from a pharma in whatever form and that is still a 400 per cent rise from here."

Anyone who wanted 120 could have sold this time last year but didn't. This isn't the right time for bids & offers, let them get on with the job in hand.