Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
Looks like GSA not signed transcipt confirms - signature eluded too was that of gas agreement (gas addendum) on 25 November 2022.
GSA specifically mentioned as in final negotiations - could be tomorrow could be months away
https://twitter.com/james_ashton_/status/1664257489183948803/photo/1
The only thing you can be sure on is if Andy is in, its through a placing... past, present or future that is -.-
Hes the sort of chap who raids the reduced section in supermarkets and bangs it all in the freezer. Cant argue with it thought, just doesnt take much knowledge or skill, everything will go up if you buy it at a discount
Johnchilds, the newbie on twitter? That chap is clueless, just see him jumping from share to share buying high selling low, following all the other new accounts on Twitter... what a ridiculous comment that he could move the SP. Probably written by himself along with all the fake accounts he uses for ramping
And the fact you have never been given a guaranteed price by your broker prior to taking a placing (because its been forward sold at market price) again shows you are retail and definitely don't have enough clought to even warrant that type of attention from your broker (if you have one on speed dial)
The brokers are facilitating the placing for their clients, THEY forward sell the shares for intuitions and their own gain before they are even announced or hit the market.. its a commonly known practice and you are clearly clueless on, the fact you are talking about placees being "privy to insider info" and everything you have said/demonstrated literally screams retail and that in fact, you haven't a clue as to the game... as you are completely naïve and in the dark. The very fact you accept it exists before placing are even approved via GM but doesn't when it doesn't need approving via GM tells you everything! Vary naive indeed...
Obviously dont have friends in brokers do you ;-)
"I'm not retail" you are literally spending your day arguing on a bulletin board about how forward selling doesn't exist?!
... like sayin "im not white trash" whilst drinking beer, beating your wife in your caravan..
I am at a loss as to what to say to you... get the impression you are literally a cliché, guy in his mums basement playing with a few grand and hoping for the best.
In summary, you are as retail as they come fella.. pretend all you want it doesn't change facts, and honestly just makes you look like a fool (face palm x2)
What game are you referring too? As your game sounds like kids trading cards... the whole market is made to accommodate Institutions, brokers and their largest clients... not retail, that is the real game... and you clearly don't know it as you are demonstrating with your naïve responses . But have fun in your rules are rules, black and white market... but I can assure you it is simply not like that. ATB
My god you are naïve... cannot even entertain a conversation with someone who believes forward selling doesn't happen.. Jesus wept.
I am not mistaken, you can tell me your own scenarios all you like, forward selling happens every day kid face facts. And the fact you think it doesn't because of "rules" show how much of a "retail" trader you are (face palm)
The only thing I am taking notice of in your response is "tried to forward sell" thanks for contributing. Forward selling happens often your an idiot if you think otherwise...
Obviously havent been around long enough to witness the rises from stocks, where shares have been forward sold and the placing gets pulled... that's all you need to know.. obviously not very wise to the game. Retail (you) are the pawns dont ever forget that
Unfortunately that is EXACTLY how it works, and you are naïve to think otherwise... forward selling happens everyday must stock flipped before placing.. thats why large rounded trades and high volume normally proceeds a placing...
Unfortunately that is EXACTLY
I cant imagine the FDA have any grounds to insist on further trails, after all they have had the requirements met through various phases and studies, to move the goal posts now would be very inconsistent and unprofessional. The suggestion of dosing and measurements would surely be theoretical, after all IMM and Avion have proved what is working and effective in practice? I would imagine the crux of the issue, is having a paper trial to show DD has been given to their guidance. I would imagine both Avion and IMM would have considered dosing to the highest degree in preparation for the trails and studies.. feels like a bit of a red herring at this point from the FDA..
Also received a response. Looks like they are waiting on an executive to finalise the update, also quoted "with our partner Avion", and acknowledges pressure on SP and references the "macro economic crisis" which is currently "putting enormous pressure on the markets"
Hold for RNS
He's devoid of any logic
Post-meeting follow-up (teleconference vs. WRO)
For meetings scheduled as teleconference
The teleconference meeting is the sponsor’s opportunity to obtain clarification on OTAT’s preliminary response. Due to workload, OTAT will not be able to address follow-ups or additional questions, via email or teleconference, after the meeting is held. If additional questions arise, the sponsor may submit the questions/alternative approaches or new data to the existing IND as an amendment for OTAT feedback.
For Written Reponses Only
Simple requests for clarification of OTAT WRO may be sent to the RPM within 20 days after receipt of the WRO. The sponsor should include their request for clarifications for all disciplines in a single follow-up request. Only questions of a clarifying nature will be considered, i.e., to confirm something in the WRO issued by OTAT, rather than raising new issues or new proposals.
Examples of such simple requests for clarification include:
Typos and misstatements by OTAT
The OTAT responses can be interpreted ambiguously and are unclear to the sponsor (e.g., “Did you mean A or B?”)
Examples of follow-up requests that are beyond clarification and therefore not appropriate:
Questions related to new information not included in the briefing package
Questions related to the adequacy of new proposals to address OTAT comments [e.g., new clinical trial designs, study endpoints, new patient population, new/modified assays, new preclinical study design, new materials (i.e., raw materials, source materials)]
If such questions arise, the sponsor may submit these questions, alternative approaches, or new data to their existing IND as an amendment for OTAT consideration.
OTAT will consider the follow-up request, and if determined to be limited to clarification, OTAT will issue a response in writing within 20 calendar days after receipt of the clarifying questions. If OTAT determines that a short teleconference would be the best format for follow-up, then OTAT will generally attempt to hold this informal teleconference within 20 days after receipt of the request for clarification. OTAT will not provide the sponsor with minutes for such informal teleconference.
During the meeting
The meeting is the sponsor’s opportunity to obtain clarifications on OTAT preliminary responses. As stated above, during the meeting the OTAT team will not be able to provide feedback on new information (e.g., new question, alternative approaches or new proposals to address OTAT comments) that was not previously submitted in the original briefing package.
Sponsors may choose to make a presentation at the beginning of the meeting. However, because OTAT staff will be familiar with the meeting package content and questions, OTAT recommends that sponsors forgo a presentation and use the allotted meeting time to obtain clarifications to OTAT’s preliminary responses to the sponsor’s questions.
OTAT recommends that time be reserved at the end of the meeting for the sponsor to summarize the major discussion points and action items.
Prior to the sponsor meeting
OTAT will send the preliminary response according to the timeline indicated above in the Table.
The sponsor is expected to respond to OTAT’s preliminary responses according to the timeline indicated above in the Table.
If the sponsor finds that OTAT’s preliminary responses and advice are sufficiently clear and complete to obviate the need for further discussion, the sponsor should inform OTAT in writing as soon as possible so that OTAT may cancel the meeting. These responses would then become the official OTAT responses to the sponsor’s questions.
If, after cancellation of the meeting, the sponsor subsequently wishes to follow-up on topics from the preliminary responses or pose new questions, then the sponsor should submit these follow-up or new questions as an IND amendment.
If the sponsor wishes to continue with the meeting, the sponsor should identify which of the original questions in the briefing package they wish to discuss and list the questions in the proposed order of discussion. As a general rule, the order of discussion is usually the order of importance to the sponsor. When referencing questions, the sponsor should use OTAT’s preliminary responses document numbering format.
After receiving OTAT’s preliminary response, the sponsor should not submit new questions and new information (e.g., alternative approaches or new proposals to address OTAT comments) not previously submitted in the original briefing package. OTAT preliminary responses are prepared after deliberative review, and usually include cross-discipline internal discussion, of the original meeting package and questions. OTAT will not have adequate time to review new material and have sufficient inter-discipline internal discussion necessary to prepare answers to new questions. Therefore, sponsors should thoughtfully prepare their meeting package and questions.
In some situations, a sponsor may want to develop new questions/alternative approaches in response to OTAT’s preliminary responses or discussion at the meeting. Such new questions/alternative approaches should be submitted as an amendment to the sponsor’s existing IND.
The sponsor’s meeting package should include a limited number of clearly worded and targeted questions that directly address concerns about the drug development programs. The number of questions in a meeting package should not exceed what can be reasonably discussed within the duration of the allotted meeting time. For a 60-minute meeting, a maximum of 12 questions (inclusive of sub-questions) would be considered reasonable. For example, Questions 1a, 1b, 1c, 1d, 2, and 3 would be 6 questions.
Written Response Only (WRO) is considered to be equivalent to 60 minute meetings. Therefore, the maximum of 12 questions (inclusive of sub-questions) is applicable.
If you think a majority shareholder, privy to insider information, can sell prior to disclosing said inside information to the wider market you're a bit of a clown really