Member Info for stocksaint

I'm new here, but could the weakness be due to background selling given convertible issuance? or ii selling?

Why do you say RF is an activist shareholder?

Oh, I get it. Starres is some kind of messiah, so they want to crucify him....

I put 5k in yesterday as thought it might bounce off 12p. If it falls below 11p, I'll probably sell as the chart tells me it could go to 8p or lower.

Quite amusing Gloria,

Can't think how Starres could have affected you all so much but you are obviously missing him a lot...

Unfortunately/fortunately Stocksaint is not Starres...

Anyway, there's a beautiful milestone for today. SP just closed below the 12p support level.....

Why is grammar so important for a chatroom???

PS, who is starres and why are you so obsessed with him???

NICE are bound to say, "do 3 years of evidence generation on CYP2C19 and then we'll review again...."

RF don't want to be a shareholder, they make their money as a lender

would expect RF to just sell down the shares they have to get their money back. once they've done that, depending on share volume/liquidity they might then let GDR start drawdowns again, or they might not

Garonne, of course, at the time GDR needed to persuade investors to vote in favour of the financing deal.......

Pedro, to me reason for the continued weakness is the economic climate, which is quite difficult for consumers in UK and US at the moment. I expect Boo will start going up again once interest rates begin to fall....that could be a while yet though...

But in fact maybe NICE will decide they actually only need 3 neonatal units in the study.....in some ways that would make things easier for GDR. (it's not at all certain anyway whether GDR can get full revenue paid for the tests in the study or will just get the cost paid - someone told me they won't get full revenue for tests in the study paid, based on what they've seen before, but that might necessarily be true now, as things do change)

20 hospitals is typical for late-stage NICE study these days. that would be almost 10% of total neonatal units in England/Wales, so really would be large sample size. NICE will be communicating the finer details of the requirements for this. Obviously running a study with 3 units is vastly different to running a study with just 20 units, so they will need to state this info at some stage. NICE have definitely pushed AIHL down the funnel - so run the study for 3 years with the required number of hospitals, it must be very likely they will then achieve a full NICE recommendation, which would mean NHS hospitals would get funding for to adopt AIHL and would have to do it. that would also then mean regulatory approvals would come easy throughout Europe and US. so the carrot here is definitely real and really does mean something. the only issue is that getting this study completed and then actually getting it reviewed again and approved is going to take some time.....

A bit of a stretch to refer to the hospitals that take part in the three-year study as "sales," bighammer.

for sure they'll be based in just England or Wales, as this the territory that NICE officially covers. wouldn't expect they'll be more than 20 or so taking part...

Yes, JLC, fairly extensively - and much more than used to be the case in the past. For this sort of late-stage data collection, it's now common for the NHS to ask for about 20 hospitals to be involved. NICE has really become more and more thorough over the years....

Gloria, it might be just language, but actual "commissioning" normally refers to what goes on after a full NICE recommendation has been made....(which would be after the next review the NHS does post-data collection)

Though of course, we don't know how long the actual NICE review stage will take post-data collection - it could be as little as 6 months or up to a year, as there are quite a few committee meetings etc involved

MyIPA,

I don't completely understand your post. But NICE only completed the first review in March, so there's no way they are referring to data collection that was done prior to this time. I envisage they will want this tested across about 20 hospitals for the next stage (or are they going to be satisfied with just 8?) so will collect data over three years ahead of the next NICE review. But this will be the real deal. At that point they will either say yes or no to AIHL....

12 months? NICE just said they want evidence generation for 3 years....and then they'll review AIHL again and make the final decision. I agree with some of what Gloria said earlier though. this is now late stage clinical testing, so after the three years it must have very good chance of being fully recommended by NICE - maybe even has high as 90% or more. (but to get there you got quite a long period where not very much revenue will be earned)

Gloria, if you're saying it will take up to 5 years for GDR to secure any sort of decent revenue, I can't see them being able to raise as much as 16-20 million in one go. it also not guaranteed that they will get a full NICE guidance recommendation in the end anyway. NICE may simply decide not to proceed with it after they have completed 3 years of comprehensive testing. (if there wasn't any doubt they would just go ahead now and roll out across the whole NHS without any further delay)