Member Info for mathsprof

Don't worry about the buy sell ratio. There will be a lot of hefty late trades which mess up any real indication of buys:sells.

They have applied for authority to issue up to $1b new shares, but made no announcement yet.

I think this is what has caused the recent drop form the £11 mark. I think its too risky to buy above £9 until issue is out of the way.

keeptofacts- VAL has never had a mcap above £30m , even in the heady days of 76p (=£95 equiv)

The problem with predicting the upside is that the effect of paying off the debt also needs to be taken into account. How much of the debt might be converted to equity, and at what price (or new equity raised to pay off debt)?

Short term sentiment does seem to be driving this share at the moment, so good luck with entry and exit points. It's just as easy to get them wrong as right!

CCL can sell old ships, probably for little more than scrap value.
They can also "sell" bonds, but the day of reckoning will eventually come.
If they sell cruises to new customers, they will only get paultry deposits (eg 5%).

So selling new shares is the best option. But at what price? maybe $15 max (about equiv to £9.60 on UK price). More likely a bit less. $1b of new shares will keep the show on the road for almost 2 months. So perhaps the price better be more like $13 (equiv £8.30).

I can't see any positive movement on SP until the issue is out of the way. I might buy back in when SP falls some more. But its still a gamble.

MMs not playing ball!
Can't buy any except NT
Can sell loads @26.35p - above mp so would look like buys!
Why not raise the quoted prices?

Grace83
They were measuring Testosterone and PSA levels to get an idea of efficacy. I'm not aware if they measured anything else, but the analysis was based on these two.
I've no idea what they meant by stable disease. It wasn't spelt out.

NB
DDDD are not going on to PIII with only 12 patients, BaxtersSoup. PI/II is a trial with up to 132 patients.

Since DDDD has been mentioned a few times, I thought I'd take a look at them.
12 patients on part A of trial, and promising clinical benefit and good safety.
So on to part B with up to 4x32 patients to complete PII.

This is what ought to have happened with us at VAL with 201 in the last 2 years. However, we can still expect a Mcap well in excess of £15m (unless the results are very poor), which is why I'm not selling yet.

That's a good argument that 201 has a good future, and 301 may well bring in the first revenue.

I'm happy to hold for the time being. Roll on the headline results.

My point is simple. Prepare for the disappointment of indifferent results, and the SP stagnating around the 25-35p mark. Look forward to the excitment of half-decent results and its twice that much. Maybe even . . . and £1 is a giveaway.
I now fully expect to get into profit by the end of the week, but I remain wary.

Incidentally, what happened in the past does still affect the chances of success now.

I only (naively) expected the sample size they reported as the target enrollment on the clinical trials website.
What the unpublished data from 2 years ago tells me is that the results were not good enough to progress to a PIII trial. Larger doses, more patients was the remedy. Has it worked?
Will anyone fund a further trial?

Grace. A comment about Stach's Dec post.

At the end of 2019 we were assuming the target number of patients had been reached (50 anticipated in July 2019). The 2 year extension was supposed to increase the dose for a much larger cohort. Like Stach I was anticipating some good news, but by February was disillusioned by the smaller sample size, and the question why? With 50 patients and some fair efficacy, PIII seemed a reasonable bet. But not now.
By February 2020 it was confirmed the actual number of patients was only 18. We're now back down to 12. Have we wasted 2 years??
Like Stach, I fear the efficacy endpoint will prove wanting, mainly because the sample is back down to 12. In the earlier reported results, I seem to remember comments about the increase of dose from 2mg to 4mg not giving any conclusive evidence for a better response with the larger dose. Some patients fared better on the lower dose.
As a statistician, I would dearly like to work with a sample greater than 12.

MrCopy'n'Paste

Yes, but most people copy other people's post or info!

One more thought:
Suzy says to Kevin, "If you're going to buy some shares, do it pdq, so no-one can accuse you of dealing within 30 days of results."
I suspect though that they probably expect results mid to late September...

The director's buy argument doesn't strike true.
I can't see how any director will know:
1 the results in advance
2 the expected date of publication a month in advance

And anyway if they do, why wait until the 30th day before making a purchase? Doesn't make sense.
I know the old management used to hide behind the "closed" period as a reason for not buying, but I can't see how it applies here.
If directors have seen some results before analysis is completed, then surely they can't buy, irrespective of any 30 day rule?

The US shares include voting rights which the UK shares do not. However, in the (dim and distant!) past, when dividends were paid, both shares received the same dividend.
As a result there's often a 15-20% discrepency in price.

Good morning Stach. Sorry to hear you have sold up after 16+ years, since you seem to have stuck it out a lot longer then most. I am now hopeful my losses will finally be erased, but remain very wary of the fact that the results may not lead to a PIII trial, as we had hoped in 2017.
ATB, Mathsprof.

0.146p is equivalent of 18.25p
Dilution was factor of 125

My biggest fear is that 201 Bl**** works, but that the statistical evidence from the 12 patients on the trial will not convince anyone to fund a proper further trial. They have faffed around for 5 years with this PI/II trial, extending it 2 years ago to get more evidence.

Have we got 2 good drugs, 201 and 401 that will be shelved because the trials are statistically inconclusive? Its a real chance.
Maybe we'll strike lucky with 301 instead?

Or perhaps 501???