Member Info for NoEasy

Thanks Cdn. Really difficult to assess someone like Art in terms of motivation for his disclosures. History tells us that in general CEO's are not a trustworthy group. Would have been great to have a refined CEO in charge here. He has made excellent money out of being a CEO but I personally would have been grateful if he had stayed as a geologist/Chief Operating officer. He has over-played his ability to get a CEO position but has no doubt delivered in terms of field development. Two different skills and he is good at only one of them.

Chukkers/Whizzer, I don't think anyone can argue regarding the length of time taken, absolutely no argument from me. It has taken the Bots Government at least four years to work out they need someone to advise on the PPA negotiations because they haven't done it before. Caught them by surprise that one!

The flow tests, well unless either of us can influence the movement of water out of the coal seam faster than the company, and I note they have not changed pump size even though that is something they have identified and done in the past with another well, then the speed of outcome is in the hands of Mother Earth. Doing it faster because us shareholders want it faster then we might as well employ a team of cowboy tarmaccers to do the pumping job for us. Happy that the company are progressing at the speed they are without damaging the well.

I have also had the same thought of our dwindling 'first mover' status. It's still there but every month allows competition to gain. Not happy with that aspect despite TG stating there is enough room for everyone. I don't know why I think that way though, other than the kudos and virgin marketing potential, as we have already secured our acreage at first mover prices.

Re the PPA I can see the merits of sticking with the government. We have the government pension fund in the mix and we have the BDC, the government finance arm, in line for project financing, Might be quicker (probably not a word to be used for any avenue we would take in Botswana) to stick with the government and not to do so given their need for power could also be a slap in their face. It may be the easier option for us and if it is to keep the government happy also the reason why we have only gone in for 10MW on the RFP.

Whatever anyone's views the time taken so far is now immaterial. Its past. This is all about to come to a conclusion one way or another in the near term. Not interested in whether things have been a shambles in the past, as some things have, we've got to the point were the next three months either wraps up commercial flow rates, PPA and finance or the company really has no idea about working timelines in Africa. That would not be a good look for management.

Whizz Lol. Good balance.

I am also duty bound, in the interests of balance, to say that 11% up is an incomplete picture and that it is based upon an almost non-existent amount of shares, paltry in fact, being bought by our brethren in Oz.

Cdn, As our only link to the AGM what's your best take on why the key pieces never materialised?

I agree with you on Art, he does what he likes and he was clear that he isn't going to make timeline predictions anymore because he was being held up to those timelines (who would have thought shareholders would hold a CEO to account for failed timelines), and that he would only report when things had actually happened. I think that is what we are seeing in terms of silence from him now.

We know the Oz market is very slim on this stock. To put it in perspective rather than a headline 16% drop, the volume traded amounted to £1448 or 30k shares.

We are so close to TLOU becoming a leading contender for the major supply of energy from gas. Feels like we are always waiting but the next announcement should be one of either commercial gas flows or an agreed PPA & finance or maybe all three buses come together. On that it would be in the companies hands to only promote the gas flow to investors as being suitably stable at precisely the same time the other elements drop into place.

Biggest rolling blackouts in its history following the breakdown of a quarter of its generating capacity. It ain't gonna get any better soon. They are on a downward spiral.

Brunch you have given exactly the same worded message on a number of other BB's. How many BB's, well let's see you have a total of 19 posts to date and erm.... 17 have 'Have a look at TRX tomorrow guys, it’s been tipped as “the biggest bargain on AIM right now'.

I reckon that number will have gone up by the time I have finished this post!

Nailed it blaustein. How do we get a true independent when the medical world is has a dark pool of driven money. Plenty of examples of 'independents experts' supporting drugs not all of which are best for the public and some of which that have wrecked or cost lives. Even our GP's are pressured by incentives to prescribe drugs that aren't always what are in patients best interests.

Thirty pieces of silver is a common gift of pharmaceuticals.

'Thinking about the above I am gobsmacked I am even having to rely......'

Cd, Thanks for that, appreciate your contribution here. I'm really filling in my own colouring book here, which I recognise is never good with investing decisions, due to total lack of info. What's your gut feeling here given you have been disappointed in what what you have been told at the AGM.

Thinking about the above I am gobsmacked I am even having to upon another valued poster to give me a heads up rather than hearing it direct from the company.

What a shambles we have on our hands here.

'What I think the board needs to do is to invite one of the independent ED experts to discuss the findings with Ken on camera.URGENTLY.'

The board thought that 'everyone will be excited'. Well clearly they are not and the above suggestion from martinelwick really is a sensible course of action for them to take.

Question is why should news come now precisely when we are in such a perilous financial position?

The likelihood of Essar for example looking on us favourably is absolutely nil. It appears that they have orchestrated a commercial dispute for nearly 17 months now, stymying our ability to proceed with the project financing and wearing us down financially through fund raises of our own for general and administrative expenses.

I don't see it happening but then again I can only make assumptions based upon what I know.........and that isn't very much at all here.

Might be movement if Art hands over a sackful of OPL226.

Hard to predict when the news will arrive. I am guessing into the new year for the PPA/Finance as there doesn't seem to have been much time for the governments new advisor on negotiating a CBM PPA to get their feet under the table. The flow tests well we know they must be doing well for Colm to pass comment on them being expected to surpass base commercial flow rates. But how far off they are from reaching gas saturation and having a stable gas rate is not known. Could come at any time or indeed in Q1. Fingers crossed the well finally gives in to the force of man in the very near term.

Thanks for responding DonDuck.

So left with needing confirmation as to the process for getting this through the 'device' route as far as the Nth Amercan market is concerned. The indication the company gave was that the European market consent was almost a given for DS as a 'device'. Your concern on how this would be accepted as a 'device' is something that the company will have to convey to shareholders.

The point about how management 'missed' the possible potential of DS was and remains a concern of mine as highlighted in my first post after the news.

Some thoughtful & helpful posts guys thanks. Still feeling my way through here.

Don Duck is your concern that , "For me this is a biological effect that will need to be tested/proven against either a standard of care or a true placebo before a regulator would approve it.... ' , is in any way impacted by FrankMu's point that, 'DermaSys beat Vitaros (another erection activating cream) by far, which has active ingredients that must have beaten placebo during their trials.'

I believe that what Frank is saying, would in effect mean that DS would not necessarily need to be tested against a true placebo due to the result it had against Vitaros which of itself would have been tested against a true placebo. A result from one transposing itself onto the result of another so to speak.

Shoot me down if I've got your post wrong Frank.

Thanks as well Ananda.

Blaustein good to see someone posting substance rather than what the price should be.

I was going to post this earlier but got distracted. I am not a medical person but logically something is nagging me here and the below was how I put it into words.

'Totally agree Bandit. Plenty of talk on here about what the price could be is rather overlooking why this is still 50% down from 7am yesterday. There is substance behind that drop I feel, at least until the company are more open about why they went with Ds as a placebo (that isn't)

This trial has for me not proven a new treatment that is effective above and beyond the psychological element. Was it something like 20% of ED is down to psychological causes?

How do we rule out that this trial, both the MED2005 and Ds results, were not affected by participants believing that the treatment was the real thing rather than it being the real thing. Using a true inert placebo may have also resulted in the same results we got from this trial indicating that it was psychological issues that influenced the results not the physiological effects of the compounds themselves i.e the compound doesn't work beyond a psychological level. We have not been allowed the opportunity to discover this by the use of Ds as a placebo.

There is a suspicion of wool being pulled over eyes here or papering over the cracks as you rightly put it. Are both MED2005 & Ds as good as each other and significantly offer a real opportunity here or are they both inert as far as physiologically treating ED is concerned?

Over to you management.'

Maybe its the way it is written but 'failing to reach all ph3 endpoints' isn't quite true.

Firstly it met all primary endpoints against baseline.

Secondly it did not meet primary endpoints versus placebo.

But, and its a pretty big but, MED2005 wasn't dragged down here, it reached its baseline targets, rather DS raised itself to match MED2005.

In effect Med2005 was still successful in this trial, to be effective for a significant portion of ED sufferers.... but so was DS.

Unusual, but no disputing that is what has happened.

There is no problem buying here. Let's put that one to bed. Going up to 16p, 17p, 20p is a sure sign that the poster is a trader. Holders prior to the announcement wouldn't be being positive about those figures.

This announcement is positive in so far as there is still a product that has the opportunity of making the company and shareholders significant money. But there is a massive negative.

The negative is the role of management. A placebo is used because it is known that it has no effect on the condition that the primary drug is being tested against i.e. DS has no effect on ED.

It simply cannot be argued against that the company did not definitively know DS to be inert when they chose it as a placebo in this trial.

So the management either 'thought' or 'believed' it to be inert. The question is then, for them to believe that DS was inert , you would expect that at the very least it had been used for the condition. So was it used in a previous trial? If so and the result was they found it to be inert that raises a pretty big question here.

Holders as of 7am this morning shouldn't be thankful this is going up to 16p etc we should be asking serious questions as to why we are down to 16p.

The results have not been helped at all by the sole inclusion of DermaSys as the placebo. In fact whether that can be considered a placebo at all really is a pertinent question. Placebo's should be totally inert. How does a placebo therefore suddenly become 'the drug'. Can DermaSys be considered 'the drug' without any trial itself against a placebo? How did the company drive past DermaSys in the first place? What in-depth reasoning caused them to consider using DS as a placebo?

If they had used a clean placebo this RNS might well have opened the floodgates here. A clear no questions asked result against an inert placebo is what all trials are about. This has opened up many genuine questions.

No idea how the market will interpret this but the questions above won't, for me, be dismissed by whichever way it moves.

I'm slightly flabbergasted.