The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Time from submission to publication of a paper normally takes months. Peer review often seems overly critical. However, it is there to ensure that anything published has appropriate scientific standards. This makes for the difference between great science and people publishing less rigorous studies.
However, what matters more here is getting treatments with benefit to sick patients and Covid changes everything here. I was shocked at how little evidence for benefit there appeared to be for VIP which now has limited approval. MHRA EUA and FCA will be making their own decisions without waiting months for a peer review and publication.
Don't want to sound like I am being mean about VIP but from those two links there seemed very little in the way of trials. Perhaps there is more not mentioned there. May still be a fantastic drug and save a lot of lives just not trialed much yet.
We still know very little about the Extreme E product.
I thought the 20kW EV charger was aimed at charging two vehicles, so to charge 12 is it more like a 160kW system?
We don't know about prices. For the 20kW I had 'pencilled in' a price around £100,000 from hints, but that may be way off.
So if it is a bespoke 160 kW system with added solar panels and an electrolyser what sort of price should it be. We are then told it will be revenue generating with vague mention of low six figures. I would prefer to hear it is profit generating. The publicity will be fantastic, but we have always been told AFC will sell product when the price is low enough for this to be at a profit. I hope that when contracts arrive they will not be selling at a loss. That could crack through £31million very quickly. So much seems to be shrouded in mystery.
Medicalstudent98 just explained it beautifully.
This is for people at the cytokine storm stage, so already seriously ill.
SNG001 has been tested in hospitals to prevent people getting to cytokine storm stage. It may even work better for the most at risk group when given earlier in the illness to prevent even getting to hospital when the at home trial is completed.
Am surprised that they have been given licence for use while Phase II/III trials are still in progress. This is just for people who would not meet criteria for their trial (eg pregnant women). They seem, to be just reporting anecdotal evidence of some people they have treated who have done well. This is nothing like the evidence from the SNG001 'pilot' study. Peer review may say it is a small trial, but if VIP can get authorisation for use on this sort of evidence we may have a chance of getting through on all the data already available.
Oh Cod, these jokes are terrible.
I hake them.
Thanks johnht - even better.
Thanks for all the great research!
Impressive that they normally invest in US large caps, so they must see Synairgen as special....
From the webinar on Monday it said that nebuliser gets high concentrations to the lungs.
Someone asked if other administration routes would work. Tom said he didn't think so because the effects was dose dependent and only the nebuliser would get high enough lung concentrations without side effects.
So, with patent on the nebulised form of interferon beta Synairgen won't have a problem with cheap competitors.
We were told we were welcoming new IIs but have no notifications within the timeline.
So either these new iis did not get over the 3% threshold or AFC is not meeting reporting requirements. Could be either.
I am not a lawyer, so don't shout at me, but I have contacted the FCA help for some clarification on rules.
It seems that most of this legislation is Europe wide and falls under the European documents/rules. So the FCA handbook gives a summary, but is a bit less clear/detailed than the original in some cases (or perhaps it is just me).
So, that is why the ESMA link is the valid one. It list specific rules for each European country and is very clearly set out.
My reading of it is that it is the country of the issuer which determines what rules apply, so for AFC it is UK rules no matter where the shareholders are.
The obligations are here:
https://www.esma.europa.eu/sites/default/files/library/practical_guide_major_holdings_notifications_under_transparency_directive.pdf
see the UK section for a summary.
So, notify anything over 3% within two days of the triggering event, then two days to make the report.
Should have heard today unless there are no new institutional investors with over 3% holding.
The AZN aerosphere looks like it is a maintenance treatment for COPD.
Synairgen interferon-beta would be a time limited treatment at the time of getting a virus, not for chronic use.
So, they are not competing.
I agree, thank you Notes.
Also, they are now running a covid at home trial for nebulised interferon-beta and needing to recruit.
Eligibility criteria
Within 72 hours of symptom onset.
Over 65, or over 50 with one of their list of co-morbid conditions.
Slightly tech literate.
Sorry also off topic, but should the need arise a 50% chance of getting what seems to be a good treatment might make a big difference to someone you know, so not really apologising for spreading the word on this. I would join if they would let me in!
Muscorum that seems a very logical question.
I once tried a 'back of the fag packet ' on how many solar panels you would need to run an EV charger at home. I was shocked. I don't remember details, but I would have had to buy a small field.
So maybe the solar offers some of the energy they need, but some of it is also provided by extra hydrogen they will bring with them.
I get what you are saying and would also expect this great news to increase the value of the company and hence the share price.
But another factor today is the issue (recent and forthcoming) of around 200 million shares at 16p. Sitting on a 50% profit some will be tempted to sell and that will dampen the effect of this news, fantastic as it is.