Member Info for mikemike

http://www.businessinsider.com/r-update-1-noble-energy-to-sell-marcellus-gas-assets-for-123-bln-2017-5

I wonder if that would include Prima facie evidence such as the Register that the arbitration panel decided was ''too burdensome'' to be allowed to be produced for inspection. Sort of ''We would like to not allow evidence such as the Register to be produced on the grounds that it will be probably be far too compelling'' Yep, that just about does it

We believe that Churchill have a lot more to disclose about ROI actions other than the threat made by them against a witness, the substance of which is not disclosed. How do Churchill get full disclosure, if they are denied?

Yes done that, it asks for language which is English and then says it is translated....which it is NOT. how long to wait?

google translate stays in Indon. wonder what i am doing wrong

''Are you purposefully being dense and twisting my words or do you genuinely not understand?'' Your words are your words which makes the source 'dense' You have no idea what will or will not work for FDA approval, you have already admitted that, just you have not understood what you wrote. The only thing that surprises me is that you have not sent your latest missive to the MM's so they can understand how 'dense ' they are in retracing the SP by 30% plus. You have admitted you do not work in this end of the pharma industry, enough said!! You can always filter me if it is just too 'dense' for you. Meanwhile, I choose to hold the BOD culpable, Mr market seems to agree. In the meantime we all wait to see if the watered down version will get accepted and maybe the SP will reflect that value as well. As for the missing clinical test, well i am sure our BOD will get that sorted, just hope it will be to the satisfaction of the FDA. and Mr market

so ''I am telling you now as someone in this industry that the FDA being difficult and asking for more than other regulators is normal.'' So not understanding that a clinical trial would be needed is a normal fail? For FDA i think not!! that MHRA accepted is not a given for FDA or others at anytime . I would expect the BOD and anyone person working in the industry to know this. I am not 'people' or 'angry' just pointing out that professional expectations are not being met, that is my view based upon the results and mr market concurs. FDA have rejected this that's why it has not progressed. The FDA may accept the results of a clinical trial as and when and if we get one. If the FDA had not rejected we would nit see a loss over 30%. ''Or OTC as reduced GI hopefully.'' Yes anything at this stage please including the watered down version. ''Grow up - thats part and parcel of investing in pharma.'' Looking in the mirror as you posted? That other investors see this in a different light to someone who admits he works in the industry but not at this level, is something you are just going to have to get over. I am expecting a highly detailed road map from the BOD including the outline of the steps to be taken to meet FDA requirements. There can be no more excuses that blame the FDA for quite rightly rejecting on clear grounds that in my opinion should have been better understood by the BOD. The FDA receives many applications and the requirements of clinical trials seem to be in place. Where they are not others learn. There will be other companies who before presenting to FDA will ask the question about clinical trials, shame our BOD did not. Unlike some, I am not emotionally involved in a share so I will criticise where I feel,it is correct to do so. FDA rejection at this stage and Mr market have said the same. I trust their judgement over any bulletin board poster, including me!!

yes it was both FDA and mr Market say so that it may get a watered down version through sometime later is a probability, we have to wait for the BOD on that one. In the meantime they may have started the process for the missing clinical trial that led to the rejection. i am invested here and do not need you or anyone else to sugar coat the bad taste of the rejection. Begs the question why are u you trying to be misleading, which part of the RNS advising DFA rejection at this stage do you not get. I am hopeful it will get turned around. Suggest you go back through the posts about the big buys and news must have leaked etc....followed by 1/3 retrace for the FDA rejection. No one should ever believe anything on a BB, DYOR with a RNS or two is not a bad place to start.

last time we had a post like that the FDA rejection followed

Or Have ICSID thrown this case whilst letting ROI feel that they have done their best

If we get annulment, get back from suspension and get a case funding ''no win no fee'' The SP may just pleasantly surprise everyone.

Not so much a speedy process but speedier than usual as it is an additive to existing FDA approved drugs The interview given by the CEO to the lse team with a Zak Mir suggests this is not going to be such an elongated process. Anyway back to hibernation

when something as obvious as this is revealed. the only defense will be to blame the claimants for not understanding How a claimant is expected to know what they do not know just because the arbiters say so remains a mystery

''reflects badly on Indonesia as an investment destination. " Could have added ''reflects badly on Indonesia as an investment destination and on ICSID for admitting Mr Noor statement in defiance of their advising that the statement would not be admitted for non compliance of ICSID procedures. "

Yes i did read it and yes the police reort does appear in another section. For impact I think they could have added the part i suggest as it is a logical rebuttal of the statement they have made . More so when they have openly speculated on who may be responsible, ie ridlamata without any evidence to prove the statement . let alone unable to name the '' insider'' The conclusion then is that without evidence there is No ''insider'' and ridlamata did no wrong as there is no evidence to support this theory. That the arbiters have theorised, which in a court of law means ''fabricated'' a conspiracy that they admit they cannot prove ever existed. in a court a judge would have thrown that out and the arbiters with it!!

156. They could have added That a police investigation held under ROI law and requested by the claimants found no evidence of forged documenst which would be needed to support accusations of fraud

Cya all in a couple of years, back to hibernation

FDA and Mr market have spoken and its their voice that counts not a BB chat board. I suspect the BOD will be having interesting discussions with the largest investors here, they are not going to be PI How long are you going to be happy with price under 2p? will you still be happy if it goes back to 1.7p and if so for how long? I am invested here, for the last 4 years, very heavily, my choice my lookout and at a higher price than the recent peak of just over 3p Years of being in AIM has told me never let a BOD think that sh*t just happens. I suspect the next RNS will be more than just important.

Mr market is never wrong It is up to the BOD to provide that which the FDA has told them they want. I still cannot fathom how the BOD did not know what the FDA requirements are. Once again this is about time and money. Will there be incremental increases in the SP? the only way that will happen is if there are no other delays in the rest of the offerings due soon. FDA kicks out 1 you can expect the others to follow for similar reasons. The best thing that should come out of this will be a new road map. not sure if it will be less than two years.

The crux is that the police investigation was compliant with ROI law