Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
Not good! I think it’s time to stock up with booze and food, close the curtains and switch off all means of communication with the outside world...for the rest of this week at least.
Bojo, can you change rules of the game and switch from most gain to most loss?!!!
Nolupus, I agree with that.
Delay for two reasons. First, the backlog as a consequence of focus on Covid solutions. Second and, in my opinion, the only reason for P3 failure was down to a badly designed and poorly executed trial. Nothing to do with Lupuzor per se. Quite rightly there has to be an Avión/FDA consensus to ensure no repeat.
Chill pill time!
Great idea Bojo. Most boards are excessively dull with posters with heads up their backsides. A bit of friendly banter and competition is a breath of fresh air.
I would have gone for evg as, like Nolupus, expecting great things but he’s beaten me to it. So I’m going for VDTK. Manufacturer of super slim, flexible solar panels that are certified for use in places that are unsuitable for conventional panels. For example, vehicle rooftops; replacing highly expensive/environment polluting wet fuel generators in remote areas. They are also in collaboration with a graphene specialist on the design of panels incorporating graphene which, if successful, will increase panel efficiency significantly. SP oversold last few weeks so.........!
Closing bid Friday 8.75p
GLA
MM, have you got nothing better to do on a Friday evening?!! Seriously, really appreciated. Many thanks.
Can any better researched posters point me towards trial details. All seems a little vague which may explain the poor sp response to what was an excellent confirmatory rns.
I want to know what regulatory body approved the trial. It certainly wasn’t the FDA or EMA. It has implications for interest in and acknowledgement of results. I also want to know end points. How is the trial being measured. All a bit vague for my liking.
Thanks
I want to know
Bananaman2, a suggestion why there is a lack of news and, as a result, the impression that nothing is happening.
Whilst the technology has now received IEC certification, RNS 10th July 2019, it is still relatively new and unproven in the real world. In addition, VDTK is a small and young company having only been listed as recently as 2017. High risk therefore. I suspect many companies that are considering this technology will want to trial in their environment before making any kind of serious commitment . How long do you think that might take? 3 months, 6 months or longer if there are significant environmental changes to consider.
Early days yet and if many trials are taking place maybe a reason for lack of news.
1509,
It certainly wasn’t you as you are more than objective. Some ramping moron with a claimed extract from an email from a Sandy of FDA stating that SPA announcement would be next week. Also that our moronic ramper could get in touch with ‘Sandy’ anytime if they wanted to discuss the application. Words to that effect anyway. Early this morning and was removed before I could finish laughing!
Beats me why the likes of LSE rush to remove such obvious drivel when they allow spiteful ramping and de ramping to proliferate on many BBMs.
We could get an update on SPA next week but let’s not forget that according to the overly optimistic amongst this community we’ve been due an update the following week since the 45 day review date slipped!! Nobody can predict given current circumstances so in my view top up the glass and chill.
As for an update from the FDA, forget it. No matter personal opinions, Covid-19 is the only priority for western establishments and nothing, nothing, else is of interest. Just look at the shameful way that non-coronavirus patients are being treated by the NHS in the UK.
If you need evidence of the pressure that the FDA is under trying to find a Covid-19 solution then check out the link below. Unless a link between Covid-19 and lupus can be established and, in particular P140, then IMM/Lupuzor will not get a look in for the foreseeable future and with good reason.
Hope I’m proved wrong!!
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/coronavirus-covid-19-drugs/coronavirus-treatment-acceleration-program-ctap
CS7, thanks. I was aware of the Macron invite but what concerns me is her lack of direct visibility vis a vis IMM. Pre 2018 FDA rejection slip, she was oft quoted and heavily involved in explaining her science. A very, very impressive lady and one of the major reasons behind my original investment (not the chairman in case anybody's wondering!!). I'm sure she's working behind the scenes with the Bordeaux team, after all she founded the company with Zimmer, but I'd like to see/hear something tangible about her contribution. Just a small worry!!
Eva, thanks for posting. I stand corrected but frankly not worth arguing about as so many other more important stuff going on with the FDA at present that keeping to their 45 day timescale must be near impossible. I'm relaxed!
BTW, enjoy your posts.
I'm an infrequent poster but IMM lth and have been following recent discussions with interest. A pleasant change to read balanced opinions without the excessive and nasty ramping/deramping evident with so many AIM stocks.
With regards to the SPA timescales. The RNS of 27th July doesn't state when Avion submitted the SPA to the FDA. Bearing in mind that the 27th was a Monday it most likely would have been the previous week but when? Until such time as that is known there is not point in trying to interpret the 45 days. Furthermore, the RNS doesn't specify calendar or working days. This lack of facts is typical IMM/shifty Tim vagueness as all objective LTHs should know! Most business statements regarding timescales mean working days not calendar days and that is my interpretation for the 45 days.
Apart from that, don't forget that the FDA has more urgent matters to attend to which probably weren't a consideration when SPA timescales where designed and published......pandemic and US election of the style we are seeing today. Like it or not, Avions' SPA will not be a priority!!
IMO, the primary reason for Lupuzor's failure in 2018 was a poorly designed and executed trial specifically relating to the profile of participants. An SPA was designed and approved for that trial so it shouldn't be beyond Avion to prepare, submit and get approval for an SPA that meets FDA requirements. Furthermore, given the feedback from the 2018 failure they should be able to factor in concerns and ensure the next Phase III is rock solid. All positive.
I am reasonably confident about the outcome and long term prospects for IMM discoveries and developments. However, and there's always a however, I have two concerns. Like many holders, I have zero confidence in shifty Tim who, IMO, is a thoroughly unpleasant and untrustworthy individual. More worrying, and not mentioned for some considerable time on this board, where is Sylviane Muller? The P140 discovery was her baby and represented a lifetime's work for her. She disappeared immediately post the 2018 failure and has not been heard of since on any matter relating directly to IMM. She was the brains behind the technology not Zimmer and, IMO, IMM still need her and her team at CNRS. I would appreciate any news on that front as I feel that she still has a very important part to play in IMM's future.
Message to all...........stay calm!
TT, and if you read the press release very, very carefully you might notice that there is no mention of MTFB!
Italian, don't make me laugh! Like you a LTH nursing serious losses but despite that always amused by these moments of high excitement when the ramping/deramping community come crawling out of the woodwork spouting pearls of wisdom! Who knows, perhaps Lamellar will save the day. Well some of it!!