Member Info for The.Italian

well at least i can stop asking when he is going be appointed.

agreed idiot441.thanks for posting.

frustrating keith I'm sure. i expect II's hands are tied by their own regulatory regime etc,but it does make one hanker after a simpler more flexible age.hope you can find a relatively simple way to deal with it.

morning bignose.thanks very much for that.very interesting.i do find the OTC system a tad irritating,as apart from II i think it's only the inland revenue here who apply it for services /accounts etc, which i use (and as i have as little contact with the revenue as possible they don't really count!).i don't use regular internet banking,so barclays isn't a problem for me.sorry to hear of the difficulties you had with the new security device.it made me think back fondly(well relatively fondly) to the days (I'm talking the 70s and 80s here)when if i had a client with a bank problem id often ring the local branch manager wherever it was (yes a real manager who could and would make decisions) and discuss it with them.how simple the world was then by comparison.no AI,no big data(whatever that is,always sounds a bit scary to me)i know the world has changed beyond recognition in many ways and I'm not really of a luddite mentality.i wholeheartedly approve of increased security etc,but it can be very frustrating and actually quite stressful on occasion.as you say ce la vie.anyway i girded my mental loins last night and sought the customer services number for II in preparedness for tackling then this morning (i had decided against the option of having a friendly discussion with an internet robot about matters). got the number ok, only to find they are are not open on a Saturday! so Monday it is. good job its not urgent.thanks again for the interest.

no they are dreadful and now we have to use a security code sent by text every time we want to log in.i appreciate the need for security but this borders on the obsessional.also they are expensive.anyway i will ring them but god knows how ill get on.if i do find out anything i will post it for you.

yes flennen,i am. the corporate action note says that the account will be updated upon receipt of the new stock from our custodian.not sure how long this takes and i may phone II to enquire.i do not find II very helpful so may not be straightforward.

thanks albert.you have a good weekend also.looks like weather here in uk is going to be pretty good.

albert it was interesting to see the total market figure.i expect we've seen it before,but it stuck out for me today. 5 m subscribers is just over 1%. not suggesting it's given by any means, but it does put things in perspective imo.

interestingly i have just had my copy of the first DLI newsletter by email. it refers, inter alia,t o a free course for physicians they have just established ,the Scientific advisory board news from earlier and a major longevity conference in september. nothing particularly exciting in the individual items, but mildly encouraging that after a period of little or no news or apparent activity, they seem to be doing some self promotion etc.

hello bignose.yes i saw the DLI announcement (it's out on eureka etc now also).felt it was a bit of nothing news really.cannot see it producing any real income for a long time,but it's positive to see some development which shows activity.we probably just have to accept that the DLI aspect is going to take some time to demonstrate its value,if it ever does. you may be right on the remuneration point,but the sums are relatively small and i suppose it's a positive that the new consultants are happy to accept shares in lieu of cash.its not as though they are already on board and just being strung along. presumably they don't need to provide their services,although i don't know how much of their time is involved and they may just be punting on future value.will we need cash for the fda trial? presumably.we do have venturex which could be sold i suppose, so may not need too much,although as you say we still have aussie tax to address. all just speculation of course. still good news re results.i assume that when the trial format was agreed with the FDA there was some discussion on it size.perhaps the conversation went something like this. regent "you know we have no money" "yes, everyone knows that." "ok so what is the smallest possible trial size we can get away with ,so as to make it look as though we are having a serious go,even though it definitely won't be large enough to convince you?" "well we think about 100 or so should look reasonably convincing, although between you and me its got no chance. at that size,ha ha." "great, so 100 or so it is then." now I'm the first to admit i have no technical knowledge in this area and may be completely wrong,but i would have thought that when designing a trial its size is one of the most important aspects and one on which the FDA presumably makes its requirements crystal clear.i realise that they may have had some difficulty in recruiting etc,but presumably regent must have at least a reasonable expectation that the strength of data obtained based on the known number of participants will be sufficient .not suggesting for a second that anything is certain, but just putting my layman's perspective on it. interesting to see what reaction if any tomorrow.gla

very pertinent point BA,which is what eve been thinking.will be interesting to see what their position is over time.they have the firepower to lower the S/P,but not sure if they can work the other way round.i know I'm being optimistic but I'm expecting the news flow (when it starts) to do that job for them.

hopefully so dougie. note the use of the word "likely" in relation to the assumption re the bothersome questionnaire. not used before. i think the announcement has a very positive ring to it.not necessarily expecting fireworks tomorrow but hoping for a modest positive reaction.

haven't taken in full detail yet but very good news!

very interesting find keith.thanks very much.have to say i am puzzled why not RNSd.cant really see why there would be any problem from a US point of view,as its clearly public knowledge(if not widely known).anyway it is what it is and seems very positive and encouraging news.

interesting post,ChrisofLondon. its will be interesting to see how much of the recent fundraise goes into existing investee companies and how much finds its way into new ones.

'fraid not dougie. they must surely have to update the market soon,but whether that means tomorrow, next week or next month, who knows.

morning Djp.it is indeed referred to in the AD,but not,so far as i can see,the CVL aspect,which is i think the point of the RNS.if the CVL is referenced in the AD and ive missed it my apologies.i agree with urban that its probably a red herring and simply a tidying up exercise.bigger fish to fry imo.

agree obone.should have been included in the AD. presumably just a very sloppy oversight, but poor show even so. whther the fact that someone has got them to correct the record at this point is of any significance, we can only speculate.i do not know if it was correctly included in the original listing documents back in 2016(?) as i wasn't invested then.

big problem with trying to list elsewhere. can endurance fulfil listing criteria? virtually no income, very low M/C ! i doubt they could get a listing except on aim type market.im no expert and happy to be corrected.still tuning my radio ,but can't seem to find the right frequency.

after hours conversion RNS anyone?