Member Info for PCS1954

Hi SOG

Thanks for your thoughts, much appreciated.

I’m sure it won’t be long and the awaited Y/E and statement will be released, hopefully, answering a lot of the questions that seem to give angst to the bb.

Beautiful blue skies here in North Essex, enjoy your day!

GLA

And of course to ponder, are Sareum on Novartis’s radar!

GLA

Thanks for sharing Krone, much appreciated.

GLA

Good morning Potnak, shame you misread the intention of the post!

GLA

Warty, it’s only an opinion 😏

GLA

One person can dominate the bb of a drug development company and cause such nonsensical debate, in his own words they are just his opinions, there are many granted, some worth reading, some not, some copied, some repetitive, some contradictory and some even a tiny bit baiting - but that’s all they are, opinions and we all do it - give an opinion.

His latest last night suggests he is miffed that others had got the opportunity to buy at a lower rate than the general market, as previously he stated he was going to buy if funding sorted - things change, that’s life.

His views will always edge on caution, which if you separate the “noise” is a good marker, whilst, at the same time he will give a £1bn valuation and irrespective of the woes of dilution is £8 a share in today’s market - meaning every current holder will make a substantial return ( I believe 10p old money has been claimed to have once been paid ).

What would be better for the bb, is for people to discuss, rather than speak with such continuous immature monologue.

Moving forward, my own view is that the BoD have stabilised Sareum’s current financial position, we will get an updated pathway in the annual statement and people can decide if they wish to run with it or call it a day!

Of course, above is just my opinion and nothing more!

GLA

Concur with that Bill - good luck with you recent purchases - hopefully, maybe a celebratory pint at The Red Lion one day!

GLA

Morning SOG

The most important thing here which many used as a “negative” in their postings, even our own Corporate Broker mentioned it in their script was funding - we now have it to take us to the next stage and was one of the options I believe the BoD had.

Didn’t someone mention they couldn’t do a deal at P1b completed, not sure we have that, so that’s perhaps why.

Obviously, some of the 10p and/or even 20p entrants may wish to sell at these prices, others have said they will buy once funding is known - for me, and more importantly, I think Sareum has stabilised and hopefully will go forward.

Have a good day, and if you’re still at Sizewell/Suffolk fancy a lunch one day!

GLA

My view too Mafuta, so a 👍 from me!

GLA

Yes Laz, and whilst it can be dismissed as business as usual, I’m very intrigued that we have an institutional investor this time round - they don’t throw client’s money at small drug development company’s without some good due diligence (wonder what PH gleaned in their time involved ?).

As you say all speculation, but, then again it always has been, some forget that!

GLA

Good morning Laz, paragraph 1 my thoughts entirely!

GLA

Hi HBD & SOG

Some good points raised between you both, as you say the next update hopefully contains more explanation to give current shareholders (both old and new) a clearer understanding.

I’m not going to get involved too much now that we have the RNS and pathway intended which I’m satisfied with, that said, I’m intrigued and still thinking the BoD have been “required” to go in this direction by a third party and the new investors are facilitating the cost aware of that, otherwise, why would HNWI’s, Corporate’s and an Institution at this specific time get involved given the “situations” Sareum have been in over the last 2 years!

I did see Bill’s reply re funding, but, just my musings and appreciate there are many other thoughts and scenarios out there!

GLA

Morning HBD

Hopefully, the tide is turning and we can surf the waves!!

GLA

Evening Ben

A good discussion point, I’m hoping the BoD are a stage further and have had the talks with a “major” and chosen the route on that basis - subject as per Lazurus’ comment earlier that the other side have their requirements, this along with JR stating we wouldn’t necessarily go the psoriasis indication is the basis of my thought process- who knows we may be in a more positive position than we think!

Either way, agree with Rebster a balanced bb today, a welcome return.

GLA

Morning CB

Likewise, my thoughts too!

GLA

Morning Damion

Interesting analogy, which suggests that MHRA hold jurisdiction over any other world drug agency - I’m not sure that is the case given the information provided within the RNS when Sareum went to Oz.

Also, our new investors would surely have been made aware of the reason, potential risk and potential reward in becoming involved - why would an institution become involved if there was a “fault line” in the process?

My belief (and that is all it can be) is that Sareum have been skint due to MHRA not facilitating their reason, have begged, stealed and borrowed over the last 2 years (at a great cost to the sp and yes I’m very frustrated with that) to get where we are.

They have got back to a status quo, made a decision and in my opinion as stated when the RNS was released on Friday got through a very sticky patch and I’m hoping for a very steady recovery in the business model and sp.

Before anyone jumps on “jam tomorrow”, I seem to recall a big picnic in August ‘21 and a “Meal Deal” earlier this year!

Enough from me, others have alluded views which I think offer better debate on the bb.

Enjoy your Sunday, unpacking and gardening for me!!

GLA

Damion, acknowledge a fair point if a valid pointer in a trial phase - maybe a question at the AGM, were they careless in trial approach, did financials restricted trial length commitment and/or other reason, and if so, then why have recent “investors” now committed to back them on an oversight - yes all frustrating, but, yes very intriguing!

After a 12 hr car journey, please excuse the brief response.

GLA

Oops fat fingers - as I said long drive 🤷🏻‍♂️

Evening Damion, SOG, HBD and Krone

Just reflecting on the postings and a little tired after a long drive home so excuse if below a tad muddled, but, my recollection from post AGM mutterings was that MHRA’s concern was over the CRO used ( not UK) having just been set up as the “new” regulatory body in the UK and hence further clarification required which was never itemised so as JR stated they would move if not forthcoming and hence Oz.

I’m probably being a bit “thick” here but previous toxic studies were to enable clinical trials in humans - Phase 1.

If you then look at the route as stated of clinical trials roadway to Phase 2 readiness, further long term toxicity is part of the requirements to come and that’s my understanding of what Sareum are proposing.

Happy to be corrected and apologies if I’ve misread.

GLA

Evening Damion, SOG, HBD and Krone

Just reflecting on the postings and a little tired after a long drive home so excuse if below a tad muddled, but, my recollection from post AGM mutterings was that MHRA’s concern was over the CRO used ( not UK) having just been set up as the “new” regulatory body in the UK and hence further clarification required which was never itemised so as JR stated they would move if not forthcoming and hence Oz.

I’m probably being a bit “thick” here but previous toxic studies were to enable clinical trials in humans - Phase 1.

If you then look at the route as stated of clinical trials roadway to Phase 2 readiness, further long term toxicity is part of the requirements to come and that’s my understanding of what Sareum are proposing.

Happy to be corrected and apologies if I’ve misread.

GLA