Member Info for RollingInIt

I don't recall what you called Technick, so I couldn't possibly comment.

Softy

More B.S. From you.

They only approved one application within one day and that was for Roche.

Timescales have not extended and again your mathematical 'analysis' was inept.

As was your imaginary friends, namely, 'people in the industry'.

Not according to 'what people in the industry are saying'

There's a million 'rumours' and they've only approved two of them .... in seven years !

Softy

What you really meant, was:

'So, you've demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that I was making all that s.h.i.t. up about 'people in the industry' and 'August'.

Trot on, desperado.

Couldn't agree more, Suble.

You've been around here far too long, devoting far too much time on an investment you don't have any financial interest in.

Very productive use of time, not, so you've learned nothing over 'the purported years'.

Grim

Made me laugh because I don't read them either.

Very boring.

Softy

You'll be waiting a long time for any apology, if for no other reason than your argument is flawed.

Just because the FDA receive hundreds of applications and have only issued EUA's for 125 doesn't give any indication of the amount of time it takes to get an EUA or the total number of applications completed.

You're mistakenly assuming that 'every' application gets approved and ignoring the number of cases completed that don't get approval.

So, again, you're guessing with amateur claims of 'people in the industry' for August.

Trot on.

Smelly

You can write any market off you like in your own mind.

However, despite your self appointed 'Armchair CEO' status, you're not running the company.

Safy

You're making it up.

'People in the industry'.

Hilarious.

None of us know.

You're just another 'guesser'

Samolly and Badmashy

Pretending they know how to run a company, as armchair CEO's.

Pumping out GDR trashing posts.

Bore off.

Subtle

We already know GDR's test price is competitive but the market for tests isn't at that stage yet for the simple reason that despite the number of entrants, there's still not enough tests being produced to satisfy demand.

If the market needs a product, yes, it will opt for the most competitive as first choice but if there's insufficient stock of the first choice to satisfy demand, then the more expensive offerings will sell too. Simple supply and demand.

Jh

So have I in the past but I disagree with your premise.

If they hadn't put a value on it, which they did at 'over £1 Million', so they've quantified it to the date of the RNS announcement, I'd be more cautious.

It's no different to taking orders for a product that is yet to be manufactured, yet to be delivered or yet to be released etc, such as a new model of Apple Iphone.

The product is manufactured, is available, is proven to work, but just needs relevant approvals, or in other words 'awaiting release'.

Mugsy

That's where you've translated it how 'you' want to.

'Equally', meaning equal to the fact that they don't even have a test available at AVCT yet.

No test yet, nothing to sell yet at AVCT.

My view on the 'selling' at GDR hasn't changed and it won't.

Mugsy

Welcome back.

Working for the council, you never had experience of running a Sales team.

When an order is taken, it's considered a sale.

When a Sales Manager or Sales Director asks their team how many they've 'sold' and they give the numbers, they don't reply with .... 'well that's great but it's not a sale until it's delivered and invoiced'.

Muppet ! (oops, that'll add another insult to the count)

Lp

How I devote time on here is a personal choice outside of your control.

You're still trying to defend your own position, which is one of b.s. and bluster, which strengthens the points I raised about your claims.

Until there is something official announced, or new facts are discovered, I don't feel the need to contribute other than pointing out those with personal agendas.

The 'Ken's' of this world, unfortunately, haven't yet honed their skills to disassociate agenda filled b.s. from fact.

As such, I'll highlight it for them.

Lp

The only misplaced ego in play is yours.

You're the one making inane predictions and then feeling challenged and threatened by anybody disagreeing with them, hence the constant barrage of posts from you trying to defend your false claims and guesses.

I'd happily remain silent if there was any evidence or fact provided but there isn't.

I can see through your Trumpesque manner with initial b.s., followed by thin skinned frailty at ridicule.

Trot on and get over it.

Lp

You just don't like your repetitive negative b.s. being challenged.

Tough.

There's nothing to 'learn' from you at all.

Your agenda is clear.

Trot on.

Ethio

Spot on and summarised in your one line:

"Your projections are YOUR projections. Not GDR's"

He was guessing before and got it wrong and now he's guessing again .... you know the rest.

You're guessing, with no facts, and you've already stated you're looking to buy lower.

Transparent.

Ken

Happy that you've reduced your stress level but annoyed that I've witnessed someone giving up on their dream, by simply making some extra cash from investing.

No stock is ever a guarantee, including FTSE stocks and AIM is notoriously volatile, particularly those with a low number of shares in issue, such as GDR, it drops quickly and rises quickly but if you'd allowed a little more patience and shut out the doomsters, I think you'd have been rewarded.

This is what I find unpalatable about the p.r.i.c.k.s with agendas that fill the boards with repetitive negative dross.

In my first investment in a gold stock years ago, and this was before 'shorting a stock' was around, the price rose rapidly, I was in profit fortunately, a small percentage, and then came a barrage of 'this is a pump and dump' in all it's forms, so I quickly sold and once I had, it continued to multibag.

My lesson was learned.

Don't let any of these lowlife, agenda filled f.o.o.k.e.r.s, take away your dreams Ken.

Wish you well.