Member Info for rhubarbmk2

Novice - I suppose it changes over time, but I know that there's quite a lot of holders with substantial sub 3% positions, who you'd need to waterboard to get their shares. That will substantially shrink the float. Lot of passion there for the company.....

....bet you a tenner Valtree is one of them :-)

The free-float on this share is as tight as a duck's a*se.

When some good news arrives, and the herd arrive to load up, it's going to be stuck at 22p isn't it.

Those buys must be Valtree.

He doesn't want to be out for the weekend.

:-)

It does bloody work; George was right. With a better clinical trial, it should work bloody better too.

Yes; there's a Phase 2b-ready clinical candidate, in a company where you can get 16 shares for the price of a Big Mac, SG.

Talking in the third person again.

A bit like an arrogant sports personality, but without the talent.

To be fair Valtree, you've only made one obvious non-third-party slip up in all your posts, so credit to you, but don't let that put you off, because I genuinely enjoy your banter. I just wish you'd engage in the science a bit more if I'm honest, because I know you'd have some decent contributions to make.

I must say though, it's very refreshing to "come out". If my username could be Adam Hargreaves, then I'd use it, but the mods don't like that.

I'm of the opinion that one should speak from the first (and identifiable) person, in order to stand by one's own comments, and take ownership of those musings. But I guess it's easier firing shots from behind a pseudonym. A bit like the resident cry baby, IAR; bless his cotton socks.

In any case, come RNS day, I'll be happy, and so will you, as I believe that you still have a fair few shares, no?

Evening.

SatuV posts - hold.

Valtree posts - buy.

Valtree spits feathers, combined with a report wherein the Directors are setting their own high targets (and therefore, voluntarily holding themselves to account for expectations), at a bar way above most in the sector (up to 4 new TAs) - strong buy.

I actually agree with you Valtree, because I'm assuming that you still haven't got round to selling your shares.

That's horrendous Rodders. So sorry; there's not much worse than that. Given her age, is it a retinoblastoma or met? Sometimes there are still options, and in this case, I truly hope that there are. A

Excellent - so we can can look forward to around another 11,000 posts about your superior investment skills, whilst you recoup your £28K loss on the share, by buying in on the bubble.

Nice on IAR. Thumbs up from me.

1 )So the new Board have spent 2.4 million in the first year that equates to 600k a quarter ouch

Politely disagree - the first wedge of that, before 300K per quarter, overlapped with the previous management; they probably spent a bit clearing out the "parked/dead" compounds.

2) Physiomics PLC to enable the systematic analysis of ValiRx's clinical results because suzy can't

The previous board apparently couldn't either, as the PYC agreement pre-dated Suzy's tenure. And due to the somewhat lacklustre protocol, there isn't a great deal to "read".

3) ValiRx has made excellent progress in realigning its strategy and consolidating the position of all key projects. We also achieved a major milestone with the close out and reporting of the VAL201 Phase I/II clinical trial, demonstrating good safety and tolerability and early indications of efficacy. not true that was down to the old BOD

Agreed, and it works. But if a spot of extra bridging work had been performed in preclinical tox., with a minor protocol deviation to dose with 16mg (no idea who was advising on this), we'd have a decent read-out, and probably wouldn't even need PYC; see point 2.

4) I believe the new strategy will deliver long term growth and value creation for shareholders, but we are only at the beginning of this journey. What a statement Kevin

I liked that too; it was refreshing to have one without the words "loan", "conversion", or "secondary offering".

Based on all that, would I go for pre-emptive rights? Might. At least now you can ask for justification if the begging bowl comes out, and get a straight answer.

Novice - good points. I'm not in HEMO, but I do see that one levelling out and coming back up. Decent IP. Should find a suitor if the CEO manages his price expectations; good luck with it.

All we need now is for the peeps at PYC to get their coding on, and tell any suitors to dose at 16mg/kg, twice a week, with one hand on a sphygmomanometer. That sh** or bust approach should rattle the PSA :-)

The thing is this:

Apparently, Suzy isn't very good, or qualified to work in this environment, as per numerous posts purporting to reflect the view of the previous management.

And yet her career appeared to advance and indeed excel under that same previous management, who I assume also employed her in the first place.

Occam's razor tells me these posts are not about the ability of the CEO.

Good weekend to all.

Agreed. Better than the "this company is going down the pan; as soon as the SP is 30/50p (insert figure), I'm off" oxymoron.

Isn't that the whole ethos behind selling/JV though Valtree? It is to an extent beyond your control at this stage. Some decent data for 201 came out at least 2 years ago; why wasn't it partnered then as per previous CEO?

In my experience, it generally takes 1-2 years to pull a firm with potential/IP, from near bankruptcy, and make good, for a very competent CEO. In fairness, you can't blame the current CEO for 15 years of that cash burn can you Valtree?

However, your point is germane; because to show for it, there is promising clinical data for 201/401, and a half-decent preclinical punt with 301.

For arguments sake, let's say that could've been done for 30M. Makes the MCap seem very attractive to new investors.

Morning all.

It's only because we keep getting told how very clever the previous lot were, enduring a sustained slew of academic snobbery around scientific prowess. Yet I've asked a number scientific questions now, and been referred to previous team members and RNSs.

It's strange, because apparently all expertise has now been lost. Yet when I've asked Suzy similar questions, she's invariably able to engage around the subject matter, and is only too pleased to answer very detailed queries, is on top of all the data, and appears to have very savvy financial acumen and executive thinking.

So it's fine to blow hard, but pick a valid reason to challenge the new BOD, and don't dish it out if you can't take it, in full knowledge that the new BOD are not in a position to be able to come on here and defend themselves.

Satu - genuine post here; very interested in your take. Please do answer, and be as technical as possible.

As you are concerned that any expertise/qualifications have now been lost at VAL, how might you have managed the limited and "patchy" readout for the VAL201 Phase 1/2b, beyond some additional simulation work with PYC (ongoing)? We have to assume that the kitty is relatively empty, leaving no option no run a further trial, in-house. What was your interpretation of the data, and what would have been your next steps, which you feel would be different to the current operation?

It could be a false run, but I did reckon that the ex-Dir emergence, combined with a sustained flatline, was the strong buy signal.

Also; we have 4/5 potentially significant inflection points likely due this year. Granted that not all of these may be positive, but they're not shabby odds to take with a peanuts MCap IMO.