Member Info for RichTheNewbie

30p would actually be good for me as I want to raise my position....but this chap is just clearly being a total b3llend! (pardon the language - I reserve this now only for clearly deserving individuals)

Almost there? It's about 40p you loon.

Anti fragile - that’s why I said guaranteed stops. So they can’t be triggered below the amount you set. With normal stops that is indeed the problem and why I wouldn’t bother using them.

Ghia - sorry yeah. No such option on normal shares afaik (although I don’t actually see why a broker couldn’t offer that technically).

As for stop losses. Don’t use them. You’re asking for trouble on aim. If you’re going to use them. Make them guaranteed ones and a long way from the current price (probably more than 30% on most shares or you’re taking significant risk of a flash dip wiping out your position).
I’ve got a small position with stops on currently, but guaranteed. And over 100p away from the current price. So, if it all goes Pete Tong quickly, my losses would be halved on that position. That’s the best use of stops on AIM imo.

“ Miggy what are you on ..... cobbler was simply looking for comment and reassurance . You and Rich obsessed with paranoid feeling people are de ranking or whatever ..... come on be fair . Been v good on hear since the newbies came over”

Another cracker from the board multi-ID dunce Seb....now Org30. Hadn’t even commented on the thread in question. Only a day or two ago he was back recommending people listen to me. Seems like either he’s got a multiple personality disorder or just can’t keep up with his current agenda.

Sounds more like todgers Frank...

Can't see anything that relates to SNG on there at all.

coshman2013 - I imagine they have a good laugh at most of the nonsense posted ;)

I think really you need to open the definition up to include both rampers and derampers......and the best word to describe a collective of them would be....
A Trump.

It’s very simple....
Anyone who says this is definitely going up is talking sh*te and best ignored. Just as anyone saying it’s definitely going down or not going to work is talking sh*te and best ignored.
They had have very encouraging results and now needs various developments to make things a commercial reality. It is not guaranteed to happen but there’s definite reason to be optimistic.
Don’t listen to anyone trying to tell you whether to buy or sell. Make your own mind up.

In some ways I miss those days Woodstock.
9 months ago it was like playing chess via postal correspondence.
I’d say the reasons to be positive on this and destitute would try to think of a negative until he’d bought back in :)
Was nearly a post per day when it was busy!

I don’t know what that means but I probably could do with a beach right now :p

There’s a big difference between saying “we have to treat the results with some caution, because the trial size is relatively small, but the fact a wide range of measures show significant improvements for patients, is a strong indication that this may be a very good treatment for COVID, and warrants immediate further study” and the sort of comments many of them made. Some of them portray it as of virtually no significance!

Some of these “professional” opinions are utter ****e. No surprise at the bottom a large number have to disclose conflicts of interest.
I’m nowhere near as invested as I once was, but virtually all of the comments are incredibly dismissive, rather than optimistic with a word of caution due to sample size.
Some of them were frankly derogatory/ negative despite the results clearly being very encouraging to anyone even vaguely impartial.
Nearly as bad as that asshat of a referee Keith Stroud who I’m currently fuming at ;)

"The AZN INEXAS trial, as far as I'm aware, had two major flaws, in that it wasn't purely in patients confirmed to have a virus (only 48% did), and didn't account for corticosteroid usage (which is common in these sort of patients and believed to be an interaction that impacts negatively - ie they reduce immune response). Subsequent analysis showed good impact in the subset of those patients that actually did have a virus.
Also the trial population didn't have a high exacerbation rate, cited as a negative, although I'm less clear on why that's cited as a negative (other than for the trial itself) since surely that arguably suggests the IFN-B helped prevent this and therefore prevented exacerbations to treat!
Hence, I believe (and I'm sure I read this in an old research note from one analyst), there's good reason to believe it was dumped early because it didn't meet their criteria for progression, but may well have had significant reasons why the data wasn't as conclusive as hoped."

J_CIT - I've posted the answer to this many times (will try and find it and copy and paste).

Interesting choice of strong sell ;)

Yeah. I think the placing risk has reduced a bit in terms of the pricing. The recent price action means I'd be surprised if they couldn't get a placing away at 150p or above now (that's if they wanted to). In fact, you could argue, that if they raised a significant chunk of money at that price, it weirdly might actually provide more support to the share price, whilst waiting/fighting for a deal. I know placings are always seen as negatives - but consider that it might not actually be now. For example - the last placing at 35p ended up providing strong support - even with large holders like Landsdowne selling some and then Acacia dumping millions.

I wouldn't write off testing quite that much ChrisToffer BUT I think there's considerable risk in all the testing stocks (just asked a question to Myles on Twitter about that).
My thinking is: There's multiple players (and not just the AIM listed ones) in terms of commercial companies and governments.
The various forms of testing each have their own strengths/weaknesses and the way I see it, unless I'm wrong, is that, from the AIM listed ones: AVCT is going for a lab based accurate test, ODX for an antibody test, and NCYT a portable/distributable test. AVCT might end up being the most accurate but needing to send it off to a lab for testing is a negative. ODX's antibody test suffers from the fact there's no consensus on whether antibodies last for a meaningful amount of time yet, or are specific to single strains, and as such perhaps will have very limited value. NCYT's test is quite accurate in sensitivity/specificity but far from perfect could see it easily being surpassed by something at some point.

That's why I've not put any money into any of them (having missed the original big rises).