Member Info for pomander

Flow77 - according to KA as reported by an attendee at the MI, he has worked at Phe for a pittance because his son and daughter have done well in life - suprising therefore that they have not bought any don't you think. ? Let's complete the picture though- in teh yaer to 2014 he eraned �100,000 plus options before it dropped down to 58,000 and then rose back to 65,000, in 2016 but do take into account he was only probably working a 2 day or 3 day wek at best during these periods. The Mousetrap was out in Aussie. Gross it up and taht's far from a pittance in my book, and no doubt some nice expenses to add on as well. Its amazing how accepting shareholders are here in the light that most have lost their shirst on this one. Piltick- you have no idea if Bond sold out because he needed the money - pure speculation on your part. He has an iside track on the technology via his Ore-Pro engineers and I can assure you if Phe had any chance of making him super rich that he would still be invested. Instead he sold out at absolute rock bottom. Don't ignore the obvious. Jabber - you spout complete unsubstantiated nonsense, designed to misled and ramp beacuse you are losing your shirt on this one.

That's my point SOTRR

Gassyoil - As you are incapable of addressing any of the points raised, you simply resort to humourless, childish sarcastic arrogance. Since you know so much about them, I suggest that you go play with your trackers.

Retro - the question you should be asking is if Phe were remotely capable of achieving what is being claimed on here, then why is worth �7 m and change ? Why have directors only made token miniscule purchases? Why has the largest shareholder recently cashed all out? Why have directors been able to issue share options at a flat .05p (rock bottom) with no incentive to achive higher vesting levels? Where is the money going to come from to fund this expansion? Right now, the cost of one unit would double the shares in issue? Who is going to lend against technology that has no protection and can be easily copied? How has little old Ple on a relative shoe string budget been able to solve a problem that the major players have thrown thousands of millions at ?

Day before results announcement does not signal to me much interest in this stock from traders. Where on earth and why on earth did they all come from back in Nov 2016 post the UK launch ?

Need to transfer them to an international broker - might I suggest cotacting III interactive.

Alq- you are clearly alleging deception based upon your own investigations and your discovery that no interventional clinical study has been registered. If not a single subject has been dosed as you claim, then RP is indisiputably in my book being deceptive in sticking to the current timeframes. They were re-affirmed just last week , post any changes circumstances and any new legislation. This is not a question of poor estimates or guidance to shrug off over a couple of beers.

In which case you beleive that Dr Mike and JG are telling porky pies and doing so deliberately and knowingly. That's my point. The timelines can all be tracked via the company presentations and the reasons for the delay have been explained.

I did see a release confirming that RP had a �4 m receivable following the first commercial sales which as Bignose correctly says relates to wholesalers not end user retail sales.

Alq Unfortuantely you continue to beleive that Dr Mike and JG are happy to misrepresent the position to shareholders. The company overviews (s) continue to confirm taht the PRO was finalsied and submitted for approval with the FDA in March 2016. Approval expected Q4 2019 and launch early 2020. I am sure Dr Mike has beet things to do with his time and that hs understanding of technical issues, of which I have none, is highly competent.

Escovido - its all on the RP website - company overviews - nothing has changed, unless you believe that RP is misrepresenting the true picture.

Wongtogo- I totally agree with you, the deal cut with Wast2Tricity makes absolutely no commercial sense for Phe shareholders whatsoever. It is a mechanism to strip out profits from Phe to Wast2Tricity for providing so called Project Development Consultancy Services. That all appears rather odd to me as KA and David Ryan are directors at both Phe and Wast2Tricity - are they simply paying themselves via another vehicle for providing Project Development Consultancy Services when they could provide the very same services in-house at Phe ? What exactly does Wast2Tricity bring to the party to command such lucrative deal terms? As I have said before, the terms of the deal are hardly very attractive for Phe shareholders. A 50:50 split when Phe and indeed its shareholders have funded to the tune of millions this supposedly global groundbreaking technology. Surely a better deal for shareholders could have been struck, but conflicts of interest always distort the picture. I would also suggest that people take the time to check out Wast2Tricity �s filed exempt small company accounts. With net assets of circa 90k at April 2016 (last filed), including �120,000 due to AFC Energy, and no sign of any income from providing project consultancy services in the past, the picture is further clouded.

KA was a financial consultant at Linc Energy - trust he learnt a lasting lesson. CLN's are ofetn the only gae left in town for risky small caps - its that or turn out the lights. Linc Energy's former chief executive, Peter Bond, was warned six years ago a string of financing deals struck by the embattled resources firm ... Known as a �death spiral convertible bond�, those funding instruments convert into shares at a deep discount to the price at the time of issuance, resulting in a ...

Alq- Unfortunately and I mean that sincerely, the only logical conclusion to reach form your comments is that you believe that Dr Mike and indeed JG have deliberately and knowingly misled Regent Pacific investors and that they continue to do so by way of information disseminated at last week�s Master Investor Show. The part 1 clinical study read out due any time now and the part 2 clinical study readout due Qtr 1 2018 will presumably be impossible to achieve under your scenario and are further misrepresentations being made by Regent Pacific to investors. I noted with interest that another poster had been made aware that Dr Mike knows your identity and I am sure that you are also aware that Dr Mike reads this BB from time to time. I do hope your comments are not in way driven by settling an old score as you do exhibit an unusual amount of glee in your negativity.

Nope

Typo ? - Revised timeline? RP's story has not changed.

Price monitoring extensions are not a function of volume. The ariser when there is no market on the call side within certain specified limits. The extension gives the market time to react to this sitiuation. If the situation remains I would expect to see a sharp SP movement.

SOTRR- for all intense and purposes the sale of RP or Plethora will both produce the same benefit.

Alq - I am sure SOTRR will fill you in if there is more to add. That is precislely what slide 3 says. Slide 3 is a carbon company of the company overview dated October 2017 and the preceding company overview dated November 2016. Whilst it was disappointing that no update was provided on FDA filing at the MI, I suspect that given the timing and it being price sensitive that was not possible. I would hope it is addressed in the 2017 Results.

SOTRR- thank you for taking the time for posting the slides. Unfortunately they appear to be pretty much a carbon copy of the October 2017 presentation which itself was a carbon copy of the preceding presentation. I was rather hoping for something new, but suspect the closed period is a barrier to that. For me considerable confusion remians on the mumbers and there remains a significant disconnect between those projected by RP and those by Recordati. Whilst Recordati may have sound strategic reasons as a listed company for dumbing down the numbers lets look at the comparisons. Recordati have pojected sales of between Euro 20-Euro 25 with the proviso that this may require uplifting, as predicting sales for a new PE treatment is very difficult. So if we assume they are 40% undercooked ( a percentage advanced by our resident expert, plus or minus). That gives us Euro 35 m, net sales - royalties, assumed 20 per cent flat - Euro 7 m to RP. By comparison RP are projecting (this is peak sales and above is first year sales) Euro 232 m. This is retail so if we assume 50:50 split for add ons to wholesale price, we get Euro 116 m. Roaylties on that at a 20% flat reate equal Euros Euro 23.2 million. Using this rather simplistic approach it seems to me that RP's projections are circa 3 times more aggressive than Recordati's. There is now mention of China, a failry recent develomenet as Bignose has pointed out - and yet China does not even figure in the sales projections. Sureey if they are at an advanced stage on a lisence, they must have an idea on the market potential ? I think this needs to be sharpened up, for if there are II interested ( and I am not sure RP is on the wider HK investor radar) they might have similar questions on the numbers.