Member Info for Scinv_temp

(To be clear I was not invested in that ****e, after it popped I investigated out of curiosity)

Same, I'll be happy with £3. On the other hand, utme, a chinese company that sells nokia 3210-type phones and phone cases did an IPO in the US and price went from $3 to $90 in a couple of days. No sense at all (revenue was not supportive of that either, as after a bit of digging I found out they had a side business of making masks in the Q prior to the IPO), but the pps does not always make sense relative to the business. However, that's not something I factor in my decisions, if it happens, it happens.

What was unclear in the slides? they presented in more detail than before, not that there was anything surprising to me in there, but for a more general audience it provided more clarity the way I see it.

In my view, the mistake was the long covid soundbite they pushed in the period before the presentation, obviously without a good enough plan to deliver it when investors expected them to. If I have to guess, because this was added well after recruitment had started now they have to chase patients to complete new consent forms and fill in the questionnaire.

The presentation yesterday was that of a normal small biotech describing what they have done, what the issues are and what they are planning to do next, in some detail.
I was overexposed at some point, not in a way that it would make any difference to my life if this flopped, but enough to be upset that they did not seem to do what made sense to me combined with the company often offering soundbites instead of actual updates.

This isn't the first (or the 12th) time I see a sort of "melodramatic letter" from an investor to a ceo, so you are not alone. But, in my view one mistake was RM building a sort of casual relationship with private investors and the other is private investors thinking that it is OK to emotionally attach to company and ceo.
Yesterday perhaps it was a sign of maturity for the company, hopefully not an one off. Perhaps it is time for you to take a step back from this attachment and see it as it is, a small company trying to do something very difficult which was probably made even more difficult because of mistakes of the past, including the ones that you apparently asking the company to repeat.

Roses are red, violets are blue

Anthony, no man it's just you

No I mean supply to market and soon, at least the conference today did provide more detail and it does seem they have *some* inventory.

*not progressing them even ...

As for the activ even a small signal with autoantibodies might trigger some further developments. My worry there is not cutting them because they don't think they will supply to market in a timely manner even if it showed something.

The issue with breathlessness is that although they found 36 or so in each of placebo or treatment groups, only two from the placebo were eventually hospitalised. Though there is definitely some enrichment relative to just >65 or >50 with a comorbidity etc the correlation with getting bad enough to end up in hospital is a loose one.

That's about 18 patients treated of which only one would end up in hospital anyway. So not quite there yet for a drug that is not going to be cheap (even if it is not going to be in the £2.5K category).

Hopefully patients on oxygen in phase 3 is the sweet spot, what they will need at minimum is a statistically significant outcome of "getting better" combined with any one of the following 3
1. Fewer patients ending up in icu
2. Fewer deaths
3. Quicker hospital discharge

That will suffice for registration I think, combined with more than 1 even better

You feel like that because of stark contrast to previous tone and attitude. Perhaps it could with just a bit more "pep", but today was much closer to what I expect from this type of company. And no, I did not buy today, I simply still hold my reduced position.

So no EUA without manufacturing sorted out?
Shocking!!!

To be fair, they did clearly say they are going for marketing authorisation when they have all the data when asked about EUA in the past. The EUA speculation was from investors, not the company.

Sure, sure :)

I already know you don't :) RM talked many times about "saving lives" or "saving humanity" or "stopping the the virus" etc. But you didn't mention any of that back then, did you?

In that case aj, then you have to admit you don't know what you are talking about since yoy aren't one.

*that there are many things that they (or anyone else really) *did not know* at the time.

*I'm not going to go through ...

More things were predictable than you think, at the very least they should have known that there are many things that they (or anyone else really) knew at the time. They were too upbeat about manufacturing and potential partnerships/TO/licensing as well, they should have known none of that is easy. I'm going to go through the easily predictable issues again, I think we all had enough of that already.

To the OP. The thing is they should have thought of that since last year, we saw a rather abrupt change instead.

If axing your capital is the aim, it definitely does.

(You had this coming)