Member Info for potnak

Let what go? Some here are acting like SOG is a angel. When in fact he has given more than his fair share of personal attacks, whether be aimed intelligence, income levels or whatever. I hope SOG does come back.

I do neither. Haven't sold any here for 3 or 4 years. He doesn't need you to stick up for him, Carter.

No one should feel like they can't post but SOG did his fair share of derogatory and condescending posts. I was on the end of it a few times. Water off a ducks back. I just scroll past his posts and have done for a while. But I had just started to read again. Didn't even notice he'd not posted. I was thinking, just last week how the board was coming together a bit more lately. So who knows.

Can see the sentiment changing here. I, which may not suprise people, am still on the fence. We can only go on what the RNS's tells us. I stopped listening to SP, years ago. The firm an orderly queue was the final straw. It gives investors a feeling if hope. Never good when investing. It's a pity, that there isn't a reason to put an RNS, just so they can reiterate that licencing after tox study is still the primary objective. I feel it is but attending partnering events isn't giving the shareholders the confidence that we will get a deal. It's doing the complete opposite, in fact.

As is, raiding SKIL for new compounds. If they find something worth developing, we'd need funding and at least 5 years to get to phase 1. Again, I hope this is all contingency, to appear that we can go it alone but it's obvious here that the appetite for waiting has almost gone. The boards priority is to start showing some value.

All the best to your wife and yourself, Warty. Sareum will still be here, when she back at home recovering. Someone will post a link when they find it. They will beat Sareum by a couple of days, probably.

Think we have to make the distinction between an on licence and HWNI. Both will dilute our ultimate share if the compounds get to market but, HWNI investment, dilutes our shares before we even get a deal.

I'm hoping this event was contingency to show we could raise. If not. 10p, more dilution and a long wait for P2 trials beckon.

I'm hoping it's an informative but muted presentation. I really hope they aren't actively seeking HWNI investment as that will mean dilution and more warrants. Like I said, let's hope its more of a contingency to show, we could raise, if we wanted.

Are others expecting news tomorrow? I am not by the way. The proactive event is aimed at HWNI and other investors. Again, this doesn't scream, we have a deal on the table.

Worst case, it is trying to find investors to fund phase 2. best case, its contingency for if the speculative deal, that we made up, falls through. I'm not being negative but this feels like an event we should have been doing a year ago.

3. Speed matters - Key to keeping the momentum and maintaining speed is making sure you are talking to the right person as part of the deal making process. ll panelists agreed that if you are not interacting with the CEO or someone who reports to the CEO, the deal is probably not happing.

This is where Sareum are lacking, not in skills. It's the momentum and the poor financial hand we have. The CEO thing is so true. If the person you are dealing with can't make the decision without going up the chain, you aren't talking to the right people.

We did the egg thing with the pivot away from 1b. 1b would be well underway by now,if not finished. And we could get a lift from any positive data. IMO, when pivoting away from 1b. The board missed an opportunity to add some value for the shareholders. As usual, the shareholders carry all the risk for following someone else's plan with no guarantee of success.

As for the manuscript being published. I'm not sure that is a big deal TBH. It's phase 1 data and not exactly going to set the pharma world on fire.

Whilst I agree that paying to attend investor conferences doesn't scream there is a deal already on the table. I don't agree a raise is imminent. IMO, they will only raise if there is a risk of going into 2026 without a deal. It could be tight but I would say Oct/Nov. It all depends on tox study data. And of course 737. Even a small upfront would send the SP towards 50p.

That should have said.

*Think of 737 as the battering ram used to break in the door, just before special forces go in to eliminate the enemy. Or something like that.

The thing is seawolf. The list of possible combinations could be huge. As I understand it, in very basic terms and I'm sure there are others here who can confirm. 737 damages the area around the cancer cells. This does two things, it makes the cancer visible to the patients own immune system but that's, in trials hasn't been enough which is why 737 as a monotherapy did amount to much. However the damage to the cell it does can "let in" other cancer killing drugs that have already shown efficacy. Think of 737vas the battering ram to Greek in the four, just before soecisl forces go in to eliminate the enemy. Or something like that.

The value in 737 lies in parternering it with a promising cancer killing drug, that has trouble getting past the front door. The more potenfisl the combo drug has. The higher value 737 will have.

Could be linked to CPF,lCR when they still had control

I let AI do the work. It's charity based. both the Melanoma Research Alliance (MRA) and the Mater Foundation (including Mater Smiling for Smiddy) primarily receive their funding from charitable donations and fundraising efforts.

Specifically:

* The MRA is largely funded by public donations, with its operating and administrative costs uniquely covered by its founders, ensuring all public contributions go directly to melanoma research. They also engage in some partnership awards.

* The Mater Foundation, and its "Smiling for Smiddy" initiative, raise funds through community fundraising events (like cycling and triathlons), individual donations, corporate sponsorships, bequests, and even lottery ticket sales.

Okay, to summarize the last answer about funding sources:

The Melanoma Research Alliance (MRA) primarily receives its funding from public donations, with its founders covering all operational and administrative costs so that 100% of public donations go directly to research. They also engage in various grant programs and academic-industry partnerships.

The Mater Foundation, including its "Smiling for Smiddy" initiative, gets its funding largely from community fundraising events (like cycling and triathlon challenges), individual donations, corporate sponsorships, and bequests. "Smiling for Smiddy" specifically honors Adam Smiddy, who passed away from melanoma, and focuses on raising money for cancer research at Mater.

Celtic. It's scientists with cancer cells in a dish. They can freely buy the compound and not tell anyone what they are doing with it. All part of the scientific process. I didn't delve to deep into the report. It you wanted to find out who and why. Follow the money. Who funded it and where do they get their funds from.

Yes, although interesting. The study was in vitro and hydroxyurea is a genetic cancer drug. So whilst it adds to the list of possible combo indications it's doesn't tie 737 to any big pharma as I would imagine, most of them have thier version of hydroxyurea. Still in the same position. We need cash to trial it in humans.

Bailiff - my break even is almost identical to yours but I have 300k shares. £3k for every penny rise and I honestly believe the SP should be nearer £1 than 20p. Certainly over 50p. The overall message just needs to be better.

Hopefully, the board are reading this thread and will endeavor to use better language in future updates and be clearer re the strategy. The sareum shareholders are loyal and patient but that doesn't mean we will accept being kept on the dark with only platitudes to keep us going.

Fortunately, the size of your holding has no bearing on what news you can be given. That is even the case for the HNWI. Any news has to be released to the market via an RNS.

The only way we could force their hand is by calling an EGM. I for one, do not want that. We have to give the board the benefit of doubt, at least until tox study news starts to trickle in.