Member Info for richlist

Protection to a patent applies from the submission date, so is already in place.
Can take years to go through the whole process, but that doesn't matter in terms of protecting the invention.

This is fantastic news re: patents.
The previous patents were not covid bulletproof. How could they have been when covid was unknown when they were submitted.
Well done to RM for submitting them so fast after 'the invention'. Impressed by organised getting ducks in a row so far and waiting to see what happens next and hopefully very soon.
This extends duration of protection to maximum for covid which is great news in terms of value.

May not have increased the share price, but another piece of risk removed for me.

Thanks Bumble! I still have a few and may be back if I feel more confidence here in the future.
I just wonder if the price of product is a reason for limited sales and whether that will ever be resolved.

I note it is now a year since the last De Nora joint development with reducing price as one of the targets.
No news on progress there yet. Perhaps there has been great success, or maybe another year of JD with a view to further price reductions. I no longer assume that no news is good news and lack of communication remains a big problem.

Other fuel cell companies have foundered on never getting down to a reasonable price point for mass sales. Options are either no sales, or death spiral of repeated dilution with sales at a loss. AFC have always promised their product would be cheap enough to make profit, but not clear to me this is the case when everything is so secret squirrel. Possibly the secret squirrel is because they don't want to clarify that problem.

Valuation will depend on business model.

1) This could selling products to paying customers and making a profit - good.

2) It could be the way many fuel cell companies have gone. Getting product out there but below cost (perhaps claiming that costs will reduce with economy of scale). Doing this will mean continual loss and repeated fundraising and dilution. This model probably not really an investment.

So details of deal size are important and I can see why the market is not impressed when they are not mentioned. This may be ominous. After 14 years I have sold most of my AFC shares and very relieved to have made this difficult decision. Just could no longer feel confident in this BOD with everything shrouded in secrecy. The bits you can see seem pretty disorganised and chaotic which does not inspire me with confidence for the bits being kept secret. Worse is when any questioning of all this is met with no response or arrogance and contempt. Still have clear recollection of 'that' AGM and I don't see lessons have been learned.

Awonda, I understand what you are saying. I have sold a patent to a drug company from non-commercial research. I was very surprised at the verbose and pedantic way patents are phrased. But, where billions of pounds might be at stake, patent lawyers may go through the small print to present legal challenges if it is profitable.

However, covid is a new illness and they have only had 'the invention' since the results on 20th July. RM is expecting to take this forward to be an amazing treatment and probably involve drug company partners. He will be fully aware that needs robust IP protection. He will either have taken advice on the wording of existing patents, or in my view more likely there are new covid specific patents being prepared for submission as we speak. Patent lawyers take weeks to produce them and only 5 weeks have passed since 'manic monday'. I don't have any concerns that RM has overlooked having robust patents in place for this new covid application.

Thanks for alerting me to Synairgen Tetrolite, I think it was you.

Yes, I have sold 80% of my AFC shares. Think if I was posting there I would be more negative than Daz!
Synairgen is so much more exciting.

SGN001 is being used with a mesh nebuliser which gives a fine aerosol.

Nebulisers are very common, such as the ones used for salbutamol for asthma. These are just a pot where you bubble the air you inhale through the liquid. They can be added in to the breathing tube of ventilated patients. They do not do the same thing as a specific mesh inhaler delivering a fine aerosol.

No, it says Phase 2 to start in Q3 October.
Synairgen have already done Phase 2 for hospital patients and are currently doing Phase 2 for at home patients.

Rentschler has been mentioned.

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.