Member Info for Supermobileman

We hold more shares than Alora but our 'name' is not on the website list. I know several others as well. I won't go any further than that. I do not need to justify myself to an ignorant idiot.

I will repeat it for the final time, the vast majority of Immupharma shares are held by institutional investors.

Once an idiot, always an idiot.

Do you think we are all idiots, and had not checked Immupharma website.

I will reiterate again, the vast majority of Immupharma shares are held by institutional investors.

Look who's talking. It's Peterprat.

I reiterate, a vast majority of some 80/90% of Immupharma shares are held by institutional investors.

I do not need lecturing from an idiot.

I'm not saying Lanstead are selling.

If they do, there are no shortage of institutional investors to take their place. Lanstead do not always need to go through the market to sell their shares. They can sell it direct to other institutional investors and had done so.

At this time, a vast majority of Immupharma shares are held by institutional investors.

I will hopefully clarify this. If Lanstead are forced to sell, according to Peterprat, then they got to do it by November. Assuming Lanstead are selling now at this price till November and a deal is signed after November ( share price goes up ) then Lanstead would sold it at a loss than they would if they sold it after a deal is signed. Sorry for not being clearer on previous post.

As I said, a great deal if you can get it !!

What is it with deluded Peterprat and his fixation on Lanstead selling.

In Peterprat's mind, Lanstead signed up to the Sharing Agreement where they are forced to sell all their remaining shares in IMM before November. Sound like Lanstead must sell them all otherwise no licensing deal can be signed before this has happened.

If a licensing deal is signed before November, Lanstead must still forced to sell all their remaining shares in IMM and are not allowed to profit any further in share price appreciation after this month.

In the meantime now, Lanstead probably are selling at a loss heading towards November.

Wow, what a great Sharing Agreement Lanstead signed up to. They must be giving themselves a pat on the back. Peterprat would certainly signed up to this Agreement himself !!!

OSD and Morri940, I too agree.

See what happened, I too got infected reading all these posts and became one!

I must remember to take my own medication.

I bet my a.. the person (I assumed it the same person) who bought and sold this shares of 235,722 in a short space of time at a loss of £500, did so quickly to move the money over to EME. The timing would be almost perfect when EME exploded after a deal was struck.

I'm sure the whingeing and moaning over there when EME was on a spiral downwards have now all shut up.

Ogm4,

The amount of money going around the pharma industry is not mind boggling, in my eyes. It happens everytime nowadays. This is the norm.

What is mind boggling is the market capitalisation of Nvidia Corporation of $4.2 Trillion !

This one single company is worth more than the GDP economy of the UK.

Looks like LSE admin had taken off my last two posts. No swear words or very offensive words were used. The one swear word was not written in full but in format we all used and normally are okay. But still.

I am not talking about the last raise only. Generally it's all the raises Immupharma had done. The reactions on this from PIs are the same. Whingeing and moaning. That's all I read from here.

Most, if not all, PIs never participate when cash were needed. This is AIM market. Small and start up companies are cash starved. That's the way it is.

If you don't like it, get the f... out. Do your health a favour and put it in your bank.

Why don't anyone think probably. The Lanstead deal was probably the best on offer.

3.75 nominal placing price it was. Just below Immupharma's market share price at the time.

If Immupharma went for another institutional investor, they would have demanded a much lower nominal price to enticed them in. We wouldn't like that would we. The amount of whingeing would have shot up into orbit.

Tim did mentioned about this.

Is Lanstead a organization?

Is Lanstead a shareholder?

Then, they are called institutional investor.

You are a shareholder. Are you a individual private investor or a private finance provider?

Another mistake.

Got back home not long ago. Feeling tired.

Wrong word. Not anticipated but participated.

Should read,

"The point is, how many of you here had participated in Immupharma's fundraise over the years or would have if given the opportunity?"

Correction:

Missed out a few words in the sentence.

Should read,

"This way you could have the opportunity to anticipate to buy them cheaper at the time of your choosing"

Lanstead forked out when Immupharma needed the cash. There have to be advantages for them to participate. And rightly so. The money raised goes direct to Immupharma.

On the other hand, private investors like all of you here, buy your shares on the open market. This way you could have the opportunity to anticipate to buy them cheaper. The money you bought your shares doesn't go to Immupharma. It goes to another PI seller.

You now become shareholder. You can now whinge as a entitled investor.

The point is, how many of you here had anticipated in Immupharma's fundraise over the years or would have if given the opportunity?

Then shut your great big gob and stop complaining.

AIM companies relied on institutional investors for survival. This can't be said of private investors.

There wouldn't be an Aim market or probably the market as a whole if companies relied solely on private investors. But they can solely on institutional investors.

That is why institutional investors are highly valued.

Peterprat,

What a load of b o l l . . . s.

Never read so much crap in so few sentences. What drug are you on? ( and I don't mean Lupuzor).

There's nothing in the sharing agreement contract, Lanstead must sell a certain amount of shares in each month or all or part of their shares within a certain period, or whatever.

Lanstead are free to sell their shares whenever they like and whatever price they like, just like any of us here.

Just because Lanstead been selling on a monthly basis to pay Immupharma, in your mind, doesn't mean it's in the sharing agreement they must obliged do so. It's once again your deluded misinterpretation mind.

Lanstead can fund Immupharma's monthly payment through their own bank account cash reserve if they want to and not by selling the shares. The evidence suggest they are going down the shares selling route. They do so is entirely their own free strategic planning.

I agreed with Wigwammer.

You are already convinced. That's why you're still holding this share and have added more. Hypocrite.

Caught up reading the latest posts on here.

Same old vile posters, especially lord. Who the hell does he think he is?

These posters think they are some kind of entitled investors. On this board, they moan and shout the loudest. They boast of their discontent ego. They sit on their armchair with a keyboard and a screen and they think they are master of the universe.

Well, the AGM was the chance for them to go to show it. Did they go? Thought not. These same entitled investors are the ones shied away when they could have turned up and let it out of their chest as it were, by saying it straight to Tim's face what they been saying on this board.

Instead, they demand those going to relay their disgruntled messages on their behalf. Pathetic.

Now, Lord's posts at 16:42 and 17:58 demand on feedback was ungracious attitude and to wildbunch.

I have respect for wildbunch. At least he/she gave feedbacks in the past. They don't have to but they did.

Nope, I certainly wouldn't want your same energy trolling this board all day long and I certainly wouldn't want to employ you either.

I'm off now. I got some business to do. This is where put my energy.