Member Info for spike912

A lot are being marked as sells. My 125k has just been marked as a sell albeit buying near on bid rather than ask

Only. So expect yet anther placing Where are they getting any other funds from. Pumped for placing this one Watch

So where is the value coming from? There multi millions of oz gold out there but doesn’t mean it adds to the mcap. I see little potential bar long term royalties and a patent that “may” be of use long term, maybe. No income no revenue billions of shares in issue Positives?

Looks a dog to me, herd mentality being pumped by usual suspects

See the usual suspects out ramping ;) Only second wave i see is by the beach

NT to sell careful of the pump imo

And that is why I get ****ed off with many people on many boards lol.

Where’s topsharepicks with his 1p today lol. Idiots

I do agree babbler but not sure what benefit the AGM will bring to the share price next week bar some confidence, but the buys (even the 1 mil) is still only circa £5k so highly likely PIs money, so won’t be getting too excited yet ;-) It’s going to be a 6 months hold before real value comes out, and we maybe stuck in a trading range for a while yet But as I say, it’s my opinion only, doesn’t mean I’m right!

Gut feeling is that we are probably looking back end of the year for any real re-rate but certainly a hell of a lot of potential here I’m glad to now to be on board!

So is it fair to say next news flow is likely Q2 this year? June-December? Sorry still getting up to speed with my own research here. Thanks in advance IPO seems more than mcap alone

Hey babbler, good to hear from you. Yes I don’t deny the value, only entered last week, I guess I’m looking at the next news and these 1p “today” posts which obviously isn’t happening until we have the next stream of news. Don’t doubt massively under valued and seems I may have found a little gem (fingers crossed!) hope your well

Can we please calm down on the silly ramps. Long way to go yet before true value comes out.

Oladapo007 I’m not sure but I’m as confused as others given the email of November 28, 2019 stated that , Mr Hope emailed Mr Bakhutashvili: "I am happy for the company to advance discussions with Durham, including funding due diligence by Durham in an amount up to $150,000...HOWEVER...I am happy to hear specifically how the company intends to provide that junior capital in a way that certainly does NOT breach the Note Agreement.

As ever none of us really know the truth behind most of the documents, but it does seem a bit of a mess.

End of Q2 is end of June so anything before is a bonus in my eyes (as frustrating as it is!)

Ivy, thanks for sharing your knowledge please keep it sharing, very helpful.

And to answer your question Scott, my view has not changed since my said post. There maybe the need, there may not be the need. No one knows. As you do not know either, albeit you seem to think you do and appear to have had sight of the CRL and Type A meeting minutes already Another one for the filter list it appears

Scott for god sake man! No I did not Jesus, just bloody read my post of 16:27 Sunday, it’s really not rocket science unless you are inept at reading. Why you feel the need to argue and try and make people look fools is beyond me, it really is. You appear one of the worse for “half facts” and “twisted truths” to suit your agenda on here, so I suggest you pipe down a bit. You seem totally inept at reading someone’s post...my 16:27 post sums everything up so may I suggest you actually read before making stupid responses

Hey all. Just picking up on that post. My understanding is the FDA don’t offer initial feedback after the CRL. The onus is on the company/sponsor to request a Type A meeting, and any comments are made at the actual meeting not within the CRL (unless there is a pre meeting) which in this case there was not. I found the Q&A link on these meetings helpful. It seems a very prescriptive process and nothing further discussed until the Type A meeting https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cder/sb-navigate/topic3/topic3/da_01_03_0300.htm

Scott...will you please stop being an a r s e and picking selective parts from people’s posts to cause confrontation! As is say my post was clear, but you conveniently miss the part within that post that said.... “Currently no demand for additional trials according to webcast however” Or indeed the section.... “My feeling is the FDA is using a lower level of acceptance than motif potentially, and that’s the stumbling block. 3X upper limit is the marker, but none of the results from Iclaprim exceeded that.....which begs an interesting question....why deny the approval? CRL says liver toxins yet it appears within the 3X guidance. Motif also looked at 5X, which was again within FDA guidance levels” So please stop trying to make fellow posters looking idiots or you will now be reported and filtered. Do I need to continue? (And start quoting some of your blatant lies and twists..quote “Interesting that they were willing to do the meeting basically immediately on issuing the CRL”....mmmm now this tool 77 days)...or quote “Listen to the start of the webcast. It�s there crystal clear. They (the FDA) want a meeting”...again twisted when you listen to the actual webcast from the link YOU posted” Now let’s just leave it there shall we.