Member Info for lordloadsoflolly

If Royal Mail had a parcels monopoly, strikes might have the desired effect. But they don't. So many businesses currently with Royal Mail will simply start looking at other options. Many of which are cheaper & better IMHO. Sure, they kinda still have a letters monopoly. But that's a bit like saying VHS still has the monopoly in video. Whilst true, it's nowhere near as relevant any more.

It's a bit like Del Boy's "This time next year we'll all be millionaires". Sounds fine - unless next year never comes. Come on Clifford, put some meat on the bones and give us an indication of timescales. Otherwise there's a real danger shareholders like me will give up, fearing their capital is just going to be permanently rolled up into the next set of Tek holdings whose value is never crystallised & redistributed.

LondonSouthEast - I'm afraid your rather glib reply doesn't "answer that one" at all. We all know profits will be distributed to shareholders by special dividend on a company by company basis. Problem is, the implication was that this would be at (or shortly agfter) each company's IPO/trade sale. Yet here we are, two IPOs in already and not even a murmur about any special dividend. Yes, we know that'll be the mechanism. Question is when?

Unless I missed something, the webinar failed to address how existing shareholders will realise any gains, once the remaining two portfolio companies are floated or sold. I can't believe no-one would have asked Clifford that question. So it would seem he dodged it. There's no real point in pushing for IPOs (Lucy most recently) if the only upshot is that Tek's share price drops. What happened to the promised special dividends? When are they on the cards? And will existing shareholders reap any gains from the existing four companies? Rather than simply having these profits rolled into yet more new portfolio holdings, which may or may not perform well. As existign sharegolders, I think we need much more focus from Clifford on this.

maidit308 - seconded!

Yes - but that won't be constantly recurring, so isn't enough to keep the lights on long term.

bottom_feeder - yes but I think you'd find they'd run out of cash long before then if FDA approval for Phase III Lupozor were declined. So they'd have to dilute existing shareholders so heavily we'd as good as be wiped out . Not that I'm saying it will be declined, you understand.

Frits - I think yu've made your point now. If you disagree with someone, can I suggest you make your counter-argument once then ignore them & move on. Can't say I agree with your comment "And Noddy, it's not the FDA that will or will not deliver Lupuzor, it's the Phase III trail end point". The imminent FDA decision will determine whether a second Phase III proceeds or not. In the (hopefullly unlikely) event the FDA says no, it's game over.

I'm sure we'll either see a surge, a plunge or the price staying the same.

lambo222 - your previous post stated "by FDA rules, has to be sent within 75 days of the meeting request which takes us to 12 September as a final deadline but hopefully it will come before this". You therefore clearly implied a FINAL RULING would be forthcoming by 12 Sept. Now you're saying "we are waiting for the minutes to be typed up and sent, I would suggest this does not take a considerable amount of time, if there had been a delay to the actual meeting then the FDA have to formally advise Avion of this and reschedule it." It looks to me as though you're clearly inventing FDA policies & deadlines on the hoof. I doubt we'll have that long to wait. I also doubt you've a clue exactly when it'll be. Any more than anyone else does.

That was always the case lambo222. The FDA has clearly stated there's a delay. So your assumption they'll still hit their self-imposed 75 day response timeframe is flawed IMHO. Why will they definitely respond by 12 Sept when they've already publically admitted they've a backlog?

Trademarks are all well & good. But at the end of the day, it's really only sales & profits that matter.

They were lucky to get the float away at all IMHO. And at least they now have some extra cash - hopefully to fund growth. Sure, with hindsight, the IPO price was set too high. But then, after factoring in the warrants, enough investors wre prepared to pay it - & indeed to take the first day's close to a slight premium. Lucyd's NAV has since shrunk. And with it, TEK's potential NAV gain for now. But in the current climate, without an IPO, Lucyd may have struggled to raise more cash. And without this, surely the prospect of growth would have been more remote.

Yes, but let's not get too carried away shall we? We don't even know the outcome yet!

nolupus - quite. What is it with all these conspiracy theorists? Jeez.

Not really a case of being brazen surely. They've already led us all to believe the outcome would be known yesterday (so reported today). Which means they either need to RNS the FDA outcome PDQ or RNS the reason why reporting's delayed.

But thanks for the attempt at therapy nonetheless.

It calms my nerve not a jot.

I'm simply trying to recoup some of the losses from a previous IMM buy pre- Phase 3 Part 1. Yes I know - the true mark of a gambler. And probably throwing good money after bad. But you just never know.

No, especially not Eva (assuming he/she even exists.