Member Info for Sangijuelas1

Yeah Covid is far from done.

You would have thought they would have mentioned it either way

Strange they didn't say anything about it
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04983446?spons=Tiziana&draw=2&rank=3

So where did he get the money to buy the Trevi stock? The amounts match up roughly.

He still has a free ride with 4D even if he sells all his stock.

That's because of the warrants from the Longevity deal.

He is mentioned here as a shady character

https://www.google.com/amp/s/buyersstrike.com/2011/03/07/and-the-repros-therapeutics-grand-prizes-go-to-rprx/amp/

I think he is a pump and dump operator. He built up a big position 13% prior to the Blautix results and Nasdaq listing so would have made a decent profit.

By the time of Nasdaq he was down to 9.5% so stock he bought between 25-40p would have been offloaded between 90p and 160p

Until the Forte blowout and he had to start selling at lower prices.

The same day 24/02 he reported being under 5% in 4D the Trevi price began to rise.

He had about $3.3m of 4D stock and he has paid approximately that for the Trevi stock.

Why he would do that I don't know.
He started selling 4D when Forte crashed so that was initial catalyst.
Perhaps he lost faith in the microbiome or had a falling out with the BOD maybe because of 0518 or Blautix delays. Maybe he was looking for insider info and they wouldn't give.

Trevi are in P3 so presumably due to release results sometime soon. If he is event driven that would make sense as he was in Forte for P3 readout.

Either way I am glad to see the back of him. Good luck to Trevi.

Yesterday he reported buying 11% of stock in Trevi Therapeutics which would have cost him $2-3m. Where did the funds come for that?

Over the period he was buying from the 24th February Trevi rise is almost an exact reverse mirror of our fall

So I think it is safe to assume that he raised a couple of million from selling 4D

It's worth taking a look at the 2 charts to compare

I disagree.
His 24th February report could have related to trades prior to the date. For example, it could have been reached a month before then someone pointed out to him he should have reported going under 5%.

He's a dodgy geezer. He never reported buying in the first place. If he cared that much about regulatory requirements he wouldn't be banned from carrying out brokerage activities.

I think he is done here. I have a feeling

He was a distressed seller. I had always thought he was selling to raise funds to pay back a loan but maybe he actually used the 4D stock as collateral for a loan and so was obliged to sell them?

There was also a more consistent buyer over the last month or so so maybe that made it easier to offload without crashing the price thru the floor

If he has sold the lot then there is. He has been selling for 6 months. He doesn't have infinite shares.

He reported having £2.5m worth on 24/02. A lot has happened since then on the markets and when Nasdaq was shaky on inflation concerns he was selling more quickly.

That's why we are at 28p

I think his final dumps were what took it down to 24-25p the other day. And there was decent volume on Monday for him to have got a few more through.

His cheapest buys would have been around the mid twenties when Covid hit and Woodford stock being dumped.

Feels like it was prior to the pre Blautix results surge

I am starting to suspect he has. Very low volume yesterday and so far today.

Has a different feel to it as in nothing happening other than small trades and automated ones

Actually I think one criticism I do have is that they were perhaps overly influenced by Chardan and Steve Oliveira in listing early on Nasdaq.
These are the guys that put the LBPS deal together with Longevity. Hopefully it will come good but at the moment we are languishing on Nasdaq with all the other countless penny stocks.

Oliveira came in as the Knight on a horse buying up what were previously the Woodford fund stocks.

And now he is departing so basically just delayed the inevitable. I for one will be glad to see the back of him as when he first invested I found rumours about him and Chardan online. He is banned from carrying out brokerage activities in various US states.

I have no idea. Volume has dropped off. Auto trades were dominant yesterday.

I know I seem very gung ho about 4D and always emphasise the positive. I do this in the knowledge that this is a very risky proposition, as are pretty much all small biotechs. I am pretty much all in here apart from cash savings buffer.

I have done this knowing I could lose it all or forego gains available elsewhere but I think there's a spectrum of risk along the sector of small biotechs.

It has taken me 4 years to build up an understanding of 4D. Many times I have had a concern about the business and its approach but when I have taken time to research stuff around the concern, I have come back satisfied. For example, I had a concern about the safety profile not being as safe as they said but I found enough info to ease this concern. I was worried for a while about the single strain /consortia approaches I mentioned.

If 4D was down massively and other small biotechs and microbiome companies like Seres were booming I would tend to be more questioning of the board.

However, in addition to having a 10% shareholder selling all their stock we are in a biotech bear market with concerns about inflation and now worries about an escalating war.

Maybe the BOD need some credit. They have maintained clinical progress despite Covid issues, raisied the funding they have (Evelo is about to run out from the looks of it and will need to raise) and tried to stay positive despite the storm.

I am sure they would love to put their feet up and do some armchair company management like so many here are engaged in.

I think there are distinct advantages to using the single strain approach that 4D adopted in contrast to using a community or consortia comprised of anything from 3 - 100 different strains combined in a live biotherapeutic.

Certainly when it comes to dealing with the FDA. 4D isolate a single strain of bacterium and then replicate it like manufacturing a small molecule drug.

They then look to identify the mechanism(s) of action of this strain, which has been selected for its potency in contrast to other similar candidates from their donor library. Once they have the candidate they then seek to follow a development pathway that treats it as if it was a more traditional small molecule drug.

The various consortia approaches tend to have to demonstrate much more complicated mechanisms of action and potentially document the reasons why the various bacteria were selected, how they interact with each other and also control for quality and consistency.

And as DP mentioned last week Finch have hit a snag with the FDA in terms of inadequate documentation of the source of the live donor material and whether they were screened for covid. This reminds me of a company that had grapefruit seed extract in their product and the FDA wanted to know what farms the grapefruit were grown on.

I am not saying that some consortia approaches won't be successful but they seem to be demonstrating more efficacy in gastro intestinal disease and it might be harder for them to address other diseases, certainly in a way that would satisfy the regulator.

The bacterial strain 0518 has already demonstrated both tumour shrinkage and genetic alteration of cells in the monotherapy trial all by itself. Which goes to show you don't necessarily need to pump as many bacteria as you can get into a pill in the hope that you get results.

Factual innacuracies
Polygon are not a specialist biotech investor. They are an event driven hedge fund and just happen to have bought 25% of the SNG stock expecting some kind of approval and have doubled down on Infailed Interferon Beta.

It would be nice to get Vulpes on board but as you say in relation to Merck, there are many small and promising biotechs vying for their attention so it's not as easy as you make out.

We also have a CFO charged with sourcing investors. Sadly John Beck died and we have him to thank for the Oxford loan. John Doyle only started a couple of months back so give him a chance.

You seem to be missing the fact that institutional investors like to buy small cap stocks at a discount through a bulk buy placing. It's easier and cheaper for them to accumulate stock this way.

Merck have invested twice in 4D. First in 2019 and again at the beginning of last year.

I will now put you back in your green box and leave you to carry on complaining.

When I say they are similar I mean they use a single strain of bacteria and are targeting immuno-oncology and central nervous system disease.

They are also partnered with Merck and German Merck/Pfizer

4D market cap is under £50m. The Korean company Genome and Co is worth about £250m.

They do pretty much the same as 4D but are at an earlier stage.

I say this because the current valuation is clearly extremely arbitrary and not linked to the actual prospect of the company.

Yeah I looked at that stuff a while back. Had consciously forgotten but was there at the back of my mind if you know what I mean.

In terms of the biomarker data. Did you take a look at the Korean company Genome and Co that I posted about yesterday?

Very similar to 4D and just started a Keytruda trial with their single strain candidate.