Member Info for The.Italian

exactly.by the way do you think he is really sad?

don't worry ss.ive already checked out all the little green men links and they are all highly favourable,so he won't be using them!

yes I've been expecting an investment in ivy for a little while.could still happen.

agreed ss.this is total desperate.nonsense..what next? an admonition to refrain from any sort of sexual activity because little green men from mars will come out of the cupboards and shoot you with ray guns if you do! remember you heard it here first.

i shall be forming my opinion on an ex post basis,not ex ante,as my crystal ball has been performing poorly as of late.still trying to crystallise the investment case are you?total tosh!

don't forget it was linked in with the every news,which was very positive .that may have accounted for the initial rise.tbh wasn't too impressed with including the new agrarian news at the same time.reminded me of politician's cynical practice of releasing bad news on days when there is other unrelated news to serve as a distraction im afraid.just my opinion.

nobody buying the product will pay the slightest attention to the medical data.it will all be down to how it performs in practice.this will be determined by empirical experience and not by the prejudged opinions of those with a determined negative agenda.dont forget though the currently unfiltered one is invested and simply trying to clarify the investment prospects in his own mind.as you do!

it certainly looks as though the new agrarian news has impacted negatively,as the other pieces of news were pretty positive imo.people don't like complications i'm afraid.

have to agree bucolic.i burst out laughing when i read that.astonishing lack of self awareness (or deliberate blindness?)

good man FTSE!

nothing to see really in the SMNSA article.its just a superficial opinion puff piece.no suggestion of any independent assessment of the data .it does not actually say that erexon is snake oil and it ends by acknowledging(rather grudgingly it seems from its tone)that the data has been sufficient to lead the ema to be about to grant ce approval(looks like it was written before the final outcome)and for the FDA to agree to its trial.as i say,just a rather superficial opinion piece.move on

i don't think tha tanalysis quite holds up .i accept they could have sold down approx 0.97% before crossing a threshold,but given the alacrity with which they have notified the market of the crossover i think it is reasonable to assume that it hasn't happened over too long a period.i think perhaps you may have construed my post as negative.i was intending to emphasise the resilience of the s/p in the face of such a disposal.bear in mind the change crosses more than one threshold.i agree that the interesting aspect is who or what has acquired them.perhaps a further tr1 in next few days?

interesting that they were able to dispose of approximately 2.75% of the company yesterday on a daywhen the s/p went up over 20%at one point.it's their business strategy which will presumably continue for some time.

oh god!the currently unfiltered one really has lost it,as evidenced by the hysterical use of the caps lock to try and make a point which is completely without foundation.it is the absence of an active ingredient which enables fum to claim device status.nothing to do with penetration.lots of medical devices involve penetration through the skin and orifices.desperate times for him https://www.qualio.com/blog/difference-between-class-i-class-ii-medical-device

thanks bucolic and ss for putting in the detail of what i was trying to say in a general sense.

clearly doesn't wish to understand what the words "same materials or same substances" mean. same does not mean similar.

not sure you can read much into this,but real networks s/p went on a real tear when the deal went through,but very quickly reverted to its trading range and is now pretty much back to exactly where it was when the deal went through.the s,p has declined by over 70% in 5 years.i was expecting the old naps management to be largely retained for continuity but that has not happened.perhaps there is a reason and it was just very badly run,hence the large revenue but tiny profit.

whilst i don't really follow the takeover argument,i have been thinking about the question someone raised as to why were real networks so anxious to sell napster.that seems to me a highly weighted question,as there seems little evidence other than the fact of sale ,that they were anxious.i always though mvr were overpaying and that the deal was heavily weighted in reals favour(the compensation mechanism if mvr's sp went down etc).so for me the far more pertinent question is why was mvr so anxious to acquire napster.

and let us not forget that the fda ,which will have had all the data that the currently unfiltered one so earnestly exhorts fum to publish and are perfectly happy to sanction a trial based on a relatively modest subject size(100).

just from casual observation we do seem to be particularly prone to a large number of large late reported trades.not uncommon on aim of course,but makes it hard to judge trade significance.