Member Info for lordloadsoflolly

I too completely disagree with Bonneville re diagnostics.

Inaccurate diagnosis is a major issue in medicine. Any test reducing that risk is highly valuable.

3LB - you’re starting to sound pretty inconsistent now.

One minute saying you’ve sold a significant %, expecting you’ll be able to buy it back soon at around 18p, then sub 20p, now 24p. Tomorrow 28p?

J.kemp - you’re currently assuming there are multiple parties, all vying to bid.

Fact is, we don’t know how many are seriously interested at this stage still - if any.

Discussing is one thing. Putting your money where your mouth is and actually launching a bid is quite another.

J.kemp - maybe. Maybe not.

All guesswork at the end of the day.

Your posts imply IMM being largely in control of any deal timing. That may be true to an extent if multiple potential suitors are lined up & Tim’s imposed a bid deadline. But that would be a dangerous move, as what would happen if his bluff’s called & the deadline simply comes & goes with no-one budging?

Martinu - any significant reduction in Opti’s SBTX holding HAS to be reported via TR-1.

There’s no alleged about it. It’s either happened and been reported or it’s not.

As for Opti struggling, the SP clearly is. But there were signs that their larger new partners were making good inroads (unless this has changed in recent months).

Personally, I wouldn’t be surprised to see a significant upwards re-rate with the next TU. But this remains high risk, due to frequent previous misses with guidance..

Just picking up on the new website, I don’t think it’s a waste of time/money.

In fact it was far more valuable than the RNS which contained nothing much new.

The site states “Type M prevalence is estimated at up to 80% depending on the indication, with an average of 50% across most prevalent diseases.”

We didn’t have any indication of the Type M scale before, now we do. And whilst “up to 80%” could mean anything, “an average of 50% across most prevalent diseases” is fairly unambiguous, despite what others might try to suggest.

Kaeren - hmmm, wonder what happened to my 2.17pm post? Here it is again:

“Kaeren - you’re often dismissive of opinions you happen to disagree with, somewhat lazily labelling them as:

“retail pi's nitpick(ing) over exact arrival date in Nov, no doubt to kill momentum and get another trade in.”

Reality is it’s nothing of the sort. As if any one individual’s posts here are going to make a blind bit of difference to the share price.

Instead, it’s simply in an attempt to keep things accurate & separate fact from fiction/speculation. Fact is, we DON’T have November as the firm initial production date. Someone said we did, so their statement needed qualifying.”

Kaeren - you’re often dismissive of opinions you happen to disagree with, somewhat lazily labelling them as:

“retail pi's nitpick(ing) over exact arrival date in Nov, no doubt to kill momentum and get another trade in.”

Reality is it’s nothing of the sort. As if any one individual’s posts here are going to make a blind bit of difference to the share price.

Instead, it’s simply in an attempt to keep things accurate & separate fact from fiction/speculation. Fact is, we DON’T have November as the firm initial production date. Someone said we did, so their statement needed qualifying.

Cjmorley - we don't necessarily "have a November date for production".

If you read that tweet carefully it says "The final long lead item the compressor is due to arrive in November and then the plant will be brought online!"

The compressor could arrive any time in November and the plant could take any number of days to be brought online thereafter.

So yes, first production should be before the year's out, but not necessarily November.

VikR - IMHO charts are completely meaningless with a share like this.

Everything hinges on whether a deal's done by 31 December - and if so, how good it is.

Charts primarily only reflect PAST share price movement & PAST investor reaction to newsflow, both of which are largely irrelevant here.

And before you ask, I'm SIGNIFICANTLY LESS concerned about an interplanetary strike than I am Tim's assurances.

And before the usual deramper/shorter accusations fly, I should add a deal may well be done this year.

But today's RNS & website revamp make this no more certain than it was previously.

Alans55 - daft comparison between an asteroid strike & the risk of Tim's forecast failing to materialise.

Tommy25 - whatever your POV, better to have warrants being sold at 13p than 1.5p.

The main concern I've still got with Tim's past proclamations & his current RNS is how he can possibly give any firm deal timeline.

Unless & until it's signed off, there's simply no deal at all.

And if it had already been signed off, the company would have been obliged to RNS this, as it would be market-sensitive info.

So whilst it might be reassuring for investors to be persuaded a deal is imminent, I really don't see how Tim can know a) the certainty of this or b) the timescale.

Unless there are already multiple interested parties vying for it and he's imposed a strict bid deadline. But even then, he's at risk of making himself a hostage to fortune if all potential suitors walked away at the 11th hour or made a derisory low offer.

Course, the other thing this RNS might help with is Lanstead's monthly payments (ending next month).

No harm in drip feeding positive-sounding updates between now & then. From memory, this will only be the second time any funding arrangement with Lanstead has delivered more cash than the baseline.

Main thing this latest RNS does is make Tim's previous off-the-cuff predictions to dodgy Rylan lookylikey interviewers a bit more official & binding.

I note that his previous hint of "a deal or deals this year" has already been watered down in the RNS to "our stated objective of completing a deal by the end of 2025".

Still, a single deal could be enough to make things very interesting here. So long as it's with a decent partner and has a chunky upfront payment, rather than just enticing future milestone payments that may or may not ever be met.

Dear DOG

Thanks for the invite. I'll do my best to attend, assuming I can get back from the Bahamas in time.

Don't think much of your refreshment options. I'll bring some rum to cheer peeps up.

YAlam - “ ..now they are super confident and issuing an rns saying why isn't the sp going up faster”.

I can’t see ANYWHERE in the RNS where it says that. Indeed, the RNS whilst exciting says nothing new.

What IS new is the info on the revampedwebsite regarding the proportion of M responders (averaging c. 50%).

And that is a potential game changer.

RFX's closing price on day of IC write up (9 Oct): 382.5p.

RFX's price at time of writing (22 Oct): 335p.

So a 12.5% drop in < two weeks marks another triumph for Simon Thompson who - along with a certain broker - maybe didn't factor in the possibility of gold prices ever dropping.

Even though they were at all time highs earlier this month. Doh!

Oh dear.

It seems this board descends into childish mud-slinging each time there's an SP drop.

Whilst we wait for Tim to put us out of our misery (or not), peeps should either filter, ignore or simply tolerate opposing views.

Play the ball. Not the man (or woman).

OSD - you on LSD?