Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
It appears that whilst we may appear to be in dire straits on the telegraph road, as D:Ream told us, things can only get better. Megadeath’s seventh album ;)
I don’t understand why certain members, from time to time, post that they get NT on dummy trades…. ignoring the fact that:
1) there’s clearly a market for shares, shown by any data provider
2) it’s only their broker giving then the NT
In every case, I do a quick “dummy trade” but in every case I get a price and can trade.
Your NT is a reflection of your broker’s poor service. Nothing else.
Oops, that became an acronym soup! And an incorrect one at that.
CRUK is the charity.
CPF (pioneer fund) is the commercial entity that owns the rights to 737.
As CPF is a commercial entity, it is out of scope of an FoI request.
Hope that clarifies things!
…is the mystery buyer?
A private equity owned entity? Or part owned by a pharma major? Or something else?
For example, and I stress this is an example, Galapagos is 25% owned by Gilead. Now of course it can’t be Galapagos as the RNS states “privately owned” and “US” but privately owned by whom?
Whilst the RNS hints that raising funds is the licensee’s primary task, it doesn’t hint at how, so we don’t know if the licensee has immediate access to development funds or has to raise. One might think that the time it’s taken to put this deal together that raising funds could have been done in parallel with the negotiations…. maybe.
But who owns the “private biopharma company based in the US” and importantly what are their connections? Clearly they know how to market 737 once proven, because that’s the key to commercial monetisation.
Here’s a quick one-shot…. is the licensee connected to Eli Lilly?
Belhus:
https://sareum.com/about-us/#elementor-action%3Aaction%3Dpopup%3Aopen%26settings%3DeyJpZCI6IjQ2NCIsInRvZ2dsZSI6ZmFsc2V9
https://sareum.com/about-us/#our-team
FWIW I agree with you 100% potnak.
On a different subject, but briefly mentioned by gunner on this thread, I think that anyone who’s criticising Parker’s perceived performance and calling for his resignation/replacement is not understanding the role of the non-executive chairman. If in any doubt at all, the clue is in the name: non-executive. If still in doubt, a simple Google search may help.
I wonder if it will remove the text in links? Only one way to find out….
Here goes!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twatt,_Shetland