Member Info for ratcliffewriter

Doesn't inspire confidence when Inaphea is described as 'solely owned' when it should read 'wholly owned.'

'He loves his business (VALIRX PLC), his staff, his shareholders - all of it.'

'All of it' presumably includes the salary, expenses, travel and bonuses too.

...aspirations are hardly something on which to base a case for investment. Especially when the hard facts seem contrary to the aspirations.

Be fair Ray - at the last accounts they had 25 grand in the bank, so maybe they've already put the other 100 million in a Cayman Islands account ready to go to VAL at the touch of a button...oh hang on, that one's already been tried for pumping. Well maybe it's in loose cash in their office somewhere and just needs putting in a shoebox to deliver.

'When life gives you lemons, make lemonade' but do make sure the lemons aren't rotten inside, however they might look on the surface.

'it's business journey and current business position tells people where it's heading.'

I think we can all agree on that.

'insulting' should read 'in'!

Just to provide a little balance to your post Lemons - you say 'Stock bashers will always try to trick people into looking at the past, when only the future matters in investing....'

That's a blatant ramper comment - you're urging people to ignore the progress (or lack of) in VAL's products, trials and fundraising, which would be incredibly reckless and ignorant. Any responsible research into a potential investment must include a look at how they got to where they are today - insulting Val's case it is a miracle they have survived this far, and are now at an all time low with no income, loads of outgoings, a trail of unsuccessful attempts at funding, and if they aren't heading rapidly to another confetti fund raises, where are they going to get a couple of million quid from in short order? You tell me, but without using the words 'should' 'could' or 'might.'

'His job was to cut out wasted time on drugs that didn't make the cut.'

Well that's pretty much all of Val's products excluded then!

Doesn't matter howngood the bloke at the top is if there's nothing of value within the company. It's like saying you have a winning team because you've got Marc Marquez as your rider but he's being given a bicycle with no chain and only one wheel.

I imagine there will be a very positive and upbeat webinar, probably with no RNS, just ahead of the placing.

Doesn't have to be a former employee, and going down that rabbit hole could be very dangerous territory. Consider also anyone vehemently proposing a particular course of action at an AGM or Q and A session at a presentation could get a bit twisted if rebuffed, especially if they were to fit with my theory of someone chucking far too big a percentage of their funds in the hope of immediate high returns which didn't appear on the timescale desired. Promised themselves loads, borrowed (maybe from friends or family), sp rise doesn't appear, poverty strikes, other half bins them, lose the house etc etc...? A good recipe for obsessive bitterness and hatred. Who knows? Anyway, the board is so much quieter at the moment!

WTP - agree with everything in your last post. 'Over there' is being hit with such vitriol and so continuously that it seems very unlikely to be voicing of a strong opinion of a critic, and far more the ever more frantic agenda of a rather too obsessive poster or with a keen agenda. Interestingly there is another poster there who left here a couple of years ago after insisting for a very long time that Scancell is a 'lifestyle company' with no scientific value and no prospects whatsoever (after a lot of demands that as a shareholder he should be privy to any and all details of any negotiations going on). Fair enough, you don't believe in a company , you make your point, you sell up and leave, maybe pop back occasionally to see if your predictions have come true, but that's broadly it. Yet the same poster is now telling the other side that assuming Scancell comes good it will make him a sizeable amount of money. No detail on what's changed his mind, or when he bought back in (if he ever sold of course). Hypocrisy, teamwork or what?

I reported a load of them too Rob. I suspect we may not be the only ones. Comment and debate are one thing, but he was obsessive and abusive to the point of derangement and deteriorating (imo...)

If there's as much going on as we hope might be, It's unlikely that PD or any other directors will be allowed to buy a single share at the moment.

Scinv - you need to take some time out and calm down. Your credibility is suffering due to your obsessive nature.

Agreed - either escalate it or retract it. It's an incredibly serious allegation which if true will be dealt with swiftly and potentially ruin the company's credibility. However if it's a malicious and persistent attempt a slurring and undermining some impressive results then it needs removing from the board and you need to wind your neck in.

If scinv is so adamant that investors are being misled to the extent he (alone) claims, I suggest he contact the company or a regulatory body, because his current persistence and repetitiveness is both malicious and corrosive. It belongs with a higher authority or in the gutter. Not here.

Scinv - mastication is your forte after all.

Maybe get yourself a top shelf magazine and a box of kleenex to suit your true expertise.