Ryan Mee, CEO of Fulcrum Metals, reviews FY23 and progress on the Gold Tailings Hub in Canada. Watch the video here.
I would very much hold on here mate. I don't think a T/O would even break even but you might get a significant portion of what you lost back which would be worth it. There are enough events coming up for the SP to rise significantly.
That said, you should make a decision based on your circumstances. As an investor I would say hold but I am in a position to do that. If you're not, then you should also consider your own financial circumstances.
While I am relatively sure we will never get all our money back, it is worth holding here for 50-80p or so. It seems from the talk that RM does have something from the deep dive and ACTIV 2. There may be enough here for a takeover.
It was absolutely absurd for RM etc to refuse a JV or go for the RECOVERY trial. I hope he can now swallow his pride and understand that a takeover or JV is the only way forward as Synairgen simply doesn't have the juice to do this themselves. Nonetheless, the share at the moment is undervalued.
Combining Data is highly unlikely to get an EUA. It might help us get a JV or sell the company but EUA's are tough to come by and the desperation for them is less than they were before.
I'm also in Eiger Biopharma, who have an injectable form of Interferon (Lambda) which is proven to reduce deaths by 60% in a trial of 2000 with statsitical significance of 99.5%, and even for them, EUA doesn't seem automatic. I don't think SNG will get one based on what they have and I think investors should be realistic about that (unless Activ 2 results are absolutely stunning.
Re Eiger- they did what Synairgen should have done, apply a very similar technology in a trial large enough to show benefit and they did. Invest in the company, not the science. Thats what I've learned.
I'm holding onto SNG on the potentiality of a Takeover or JV but from what I know about EUAs, this is a highly unlikely pathway for SNG without a phase 3 trial that works or incredible Activ-2 data. I'm not trying to deramp I just want people to be realistic with their money.
I think what Mr Costs is asking for is a commercial strategy from a CEO whose just lost 90% of the companies valuation, no? I'm not in business, but I invest a fair bit and usually, particularly after shocks, the CEO will come out and address investors (see CINEWORLD) after they lost the judgement against Cineplex. It is rare for a CEO not to come out and talk directly to investors after a catastrophe of this kind. Marsden's approach, once again, is on the science and not the business.
It seems unlikely they would be loading up to this extent after being burned before if they didn't have some kind of plan. 25% is a huge amount to hold and Polygon aren't *that* big a fund. It does feel like somethings going on T/O wise. BUt maybe im just being hopeful.
I'm not suggesting spamming the phone lines. But I do think it is fair that Synairgen are aware, from a decent number of investors, of our concern. This could, for example, be by email. It's real, and to be honest, communication was fairly poor even before this.... particularly in terms of the very ambigious messaging. This to me feels like a continuation of went before- bad planning , and poor comms. Do you remember that the claims that SNG001 would be approved for use in Winter 2020? Or that the trials would be done by Summer 2021. Or that they would be done by h2 2021 for sure? To be clear I am not suggesting we Spam phonelines. But I think it is entirely fair that investors make known to the company their discomfort here.
As for the point with AZN..... AZ doesn't ask its shareholders to fund its trials. Synairgen did, and we did. To me, that's a very big difference.
I intend to call Consilium tommorrow and try and find out what's going on. Its actually reprehensible to ask people for tens of millions to fund a trial, lose them all their money, and then refuse to even speak to the shareholders, many of whom risked livelihoods and standards of living in support of SNG's dream. I strongly suggest as many of us as possible try and get in touch with SNG/ consilium.
Trials fail. We knew the risk when we invested. But not being willing to at least give a statement or interview with strategy, and worse, emails bouncing back, when your overconfidence has cost people cumulatively tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions of pounds is simply not OK.
The timescales for getting anywhere with Sng001 make it unlikely that a large commercialisation led by Synairgen themselves will ever emerge. That said, overall, it remains a promising respiratory drug with a unique method of delivery. WIth good Activ trials, I think a takeover is very plausible- by Polygon or by someone else. This would, however, probably rely on RM etc swallowing their pride and reaching out. I don't know if this will happen but if there is value left its probably in the inhaled interferon patent/method. I can easily see bigpharma taking a gamble here- at 1-200 million. So I think we can recoup some, but big dreams of before- almost certainly not.
I know we're all devastated so this is just some general advice which people can choose to ignore or not but I hope might be helpful . I'm personally a fairly cautious investor with Synairgen as the 'out of character' investment- and the one which lost me about half the gains i'd made in the rest of my portfolio over the course of the last 2 years. My portfolio was hovering around 6 figures before this loss, now it is a little bit less than that. Nonetheless I've come out of this dissapointed but OK and here are some reasons.
Firstly, please don't try and recoup this loss by making another quick and risky emotional investment in a single equity, . Rather than going in for individual equities, consider a portfolio of primarily funds (could be trackers) with a few, riskier, speculative investments (i.e. sng). If you do this, you will more than likely make up losses in the next 2- 3 years. Generally speaking time in the market beats timing the market or trying to select individual shares that will skyrocket.
Secondly, calibrate how much you can risk with how well the rest of your portfolio is doing. If it's not doing so well, then you can't afford to take the big gamble. If everything else is going swimmingly, then you can afford a bigger chunk. There is no guarantee any single share will get you rich quick, but it might get you poor quick. Never test the water with both feet.
I got addicted to the adrenaline of SNG and its potential (which I think was real). But actually, it was the rest of my investments, which I made in a plodding, safe, and sensible way which have made me money and offset the great dissapointment here. In the long run, the markets will beat almost anything else (including property), if you diversify , select good funds, and de-risk as much as is sensible.
Its a dissapointent but this seems over the top. They came close with the p number (0.1) on progression to severe disease and death, have passed Activ-2, have shown antiviral effects against covid In-vitro, showed statistically significant effect against COPD with breathlessness, etc, plus the phase 2 trial. The idea that there is no antiviral activity with this product simply doesn't add up, or that there was never a product, doesn't seem right. That said, you're probably right that theres no financial product now.
Actually, the P number for progression to severe disease or death is just over 0.1, which is a lot better than the obviously non meaningful 0.3 or more for progression to death. It was this number, combined with everything else that makes me continue to think that the great probability is that it works and a bigger trial would prove it.
Sadly the chances of that actually happening aren't great.but an 0.1 p, does suggest it is far more likely than not that it had the desired effect in this particular end point.
Ndn: Given everything else we've seen, its unlikely that the signal (which was quite strong in terms of raw percentage), was a co-incidence. I do believe its irrelevant in terms of trial data though. I strongly suspect if you replicated this particular trial again..... with the same variants but with 2 or 3000 participants, you'd get a signal that reaches statistical significance. My worry would be that with Omicron, which is less lethal anyway and hits the lungs less...... to get any kind of signal, how many participants would you need. 10,000? So I think theres a huge struggle in Activ 3 which is Omi.
Thanks for this, its useful.
My issue with Mortality is that Omicron has lower mortality anyway. So wouldn't you need a really high powered trial to get anywhere with this? I think it's methodologically difficult with that variant- at the same time I think the amount of evidence we have suggests almost certainly that Sng has antiviral activity against Covid.... its a tough one. I want to be hopeful, but the practical challenges do look daunting.
RM asked us to pay for his trial at 1.75, and as a result of believing in him and doing so, we have lost an awful lot of money. as CEO, not just as a scientist, he should come out promptly, without being cagey, and say what he expects from the company and future trials. This 'hush hush data-science' approach, failing to understand or engage with things commercially, and then inadvertantly baiting us by advertising tonnes of high level jobs (almost unbelievably without having seen the data), was not a fair way to treat investors that he had asked to pay for the Phase 3 trial.
Ghia, these debates are entirely legitimate and relevant. If they have seen it, then we can take the high-powered jobs they advertised+ their tweets and upgrades to be at least pretty solid 'soft' evidence that we know we are in the right place.
If they haven't, the risk portfolio on this stock is undoubtedly higher. So we have to be realisitic here.