Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
Chab, everyone has an element of FOMO, after all buying a stock is simply placing a bet that you think it will be higher in the future than when you bought it.
Personally my holding has doubled over the past year. Rightly or wrongly I have my belief that something tangible will occur.
I think any kind of agreement, be it JV, partnering, outlicense etc etc, would be a good thing for the company.
It’s all about supporting the focus on discussions.
75m shares at 0.2p
10% dilution, so not too bad.
Sorry for your loses on Avct NFTs.
FX, here's my attempt at thinking through the points you make, only my opinion but here goes...
1. From what I can see with orphan status you have to be fairly well developed and have enough evidence to support your application. So I'm guessing that the recent additional testing and patent evidence makes them more confident of success in an orphan drug designation.
I'm assuming that since Orphan drug status gives 10 year protection in the market, you have to be pretty categoric about your product and have plenty of evidence to back yourself up.
2. Repurposing... I think its company specific as to how they view it and how much risk they are willing to take. Some companies may be gung-ho about it, whereas others may be cautious depending on their business profile.
Obviously any company working on reprofiling will always say its the best thing, its in their interest to do so. (They're hardly going to say 'Check out our new product, its mediocre at best!')
When I talked about 'ownership' issues, it was more about future ownership, I would guess that a party interested would want to know that there was no chance of someone coming in doing the same thing (or very very similar). Even more so if original patents have lapsed. The Orphan designation is good because it is categoric, so alongside a new patent will provide strong IP backing to the product, so someone will be buying something specific, not just an idea.
3. Agree on the selling, imho its not lanstead as they only had 20m or so left anyway. The problem is the company can't issue a TR1 until the person who has sold has told them.
As I mentioned before, market makers can hold up to 10% without having to declare. So in my opinion the sell was stock held by an MM.
Whether it was on a single parties behalf or not is anyones guess.
Exactly Robbo, I think the Orphan designation isn't well understood by many and that it brings a level of validity to the product. And I can understand a potential suitor wanting to see the product protection that it brings, so I'm comfortable with this direction.
Sorry for your losses at AVCT NFTs, especially seeing them placing at 50p.
Why are you so concerned NFTs?
Thanks again Older.
The comment about reprofiling is important imho. Drug companies want to know that they have ownership of a product and its IP, this is naturally harder to pin down with repurposed or reprofiled drugs. Hence the desire of secured IP and Orphan Designation which, as I mentioned earlier, provides product protection for 10 years.
Thanks Older, very useful to know.
On the subject of why.... why do you care so much about this failing NFTs?
Lucky you've got no interest here then.
Can you tell me how they will issue 277m shares?
Incorrect. They have elected not to take payment of their salaries until such time as the business holds sufficient funds to
enable them to do so.
Seriously NFTs, if you're going to bluster at least sound like you know what you're talking about. Read the AGM resolutions from last year and this year before you make anymore pointless comments.
Meanwhile NXP004 has had its Japanese patent granted.
https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=JP407637337&_fid=US410558972
Since there is some chat around 'Orphan drug designation' its worth a look at what this entails.
Firstly, it is intended for rare conditions and provides protection from competition once on the market (ten years market exclusivity). So it a good thing in anyones opinion.
Secondly, its to application and designation is free and takes a maximum of 90 days from submittal.
Thirdly, companies applying for designated orphan medicines pay reduced fees for regulatory activities. This includes reduced fees for protocol assistance, marketing-authorisation applications, inspections before authorisation, applications for changes to marketing authorisations made after approval, and reduced annual fees.
We know that the board aren't drawing a salary at the moment and this process is free so not worried there.
If anything any confirmation that they have applied for Orphan status is very good news as it means the IP is secured and they will likely have a product that is protected.
Glad you care about us all NFTs, just remind me.... is this the same placing you said would happen three times before and never materialised?
I have it pencilled in, so hope to be there all things permitting
Don’t worry AJ it won’t get you anything that’s not in the public domain already