Member Info for The.Italian

good man LF. yes the MGK situation is intriguing.is it meaningful? who knows,but its arthought to keep in the back of one's mind.

hello gain bignose.just luck with fum.tbh i think most of it's luck.i think i mentioned before that i sold out of synairgen the trading day before it went up 550%.i thought i was being sensible and reducing risk!ha ha.so much luck involved.i agree that fum is unlikely to be as successful as some think.i suspect many of the original investors are now largely out and those ramping are more recent incomers.the board has gone pretty quiet anyway,which to my mind is a good thing,as its a bit too easy to get overly involved.i agree that fum and regent face similar challenges re deals.fum doesn't have the baggage of poor RTX sales, but it does have apparently a pretty poor history of other past failure,so we will have to see.

morning again.you raise a very interesting question.in a sense it's the obverse to the question i have as to whether familiarity will breed contempt( or more precisely a developing lack of efficacy )over a long period of use. clearly the latter point is the main one behind the proposed 6 month fda trial, so the jury is out for a while on that one. as to your precise question, i cannot recall this precise point being discussed on the fum board,although i could have missed it.i can only assume that if negative reports of failure to keep going as it were, were prevalent in the data (and I'm assuming the data would catch this type in incident,but could be wrong) then this would've been made clear,but perhaps not.i suppose even if that were the case some might prefer to get going even if they can't finish the journey! do i think this can rival viagra etc? no certainly not and I've always regarded the claims to that effect as self serving or self deluding nonsense. that said,i felt one of the strong points in the investment case was the need for some form of alternative for those contraindicated from using viagra type vasodilators etc. fums product is simple and apparently pretty harmless.will it help in severe cases? no and they don't claim it will, but it does appear to have some reasonable success in mild to severe cases, so I'm hopeful that there will be a reasonable market for those categories and also perhaps the recreational l(non ed) market. for me fum was just a punt based on low m/c( as was)and lombard's significant involvement in the placing in dec2019.it's done very well and my original stake and some reasonable profit is already out.i do have quite a substantial amount left in,due to the s/p increase,but its unlikely i shall remain after first licensing deal(unless it is very good and even then probably not )if deal id poor i expect s/p to tank and will probably be out.if deal is good i expect s/p to rise significantly and i will probably be largely out,so either way my time scale here is likely to be quite short as i don't intend to wait for sales etc, in case they are poor for reasons such as non sustainability or otherwise.sorry to go on a bit but its helpful to clarify my thoughts.in short your concerns as to efficacy are perfectly reasonable and serve to demonstrate why one needs to be fairly circumspect in assessing the more extravagant claims.now a combination of fums gel and fortacin? sales slogan"get going and keep going!".theres a thought.

morning bignose.my thoughts re results run very much along your lines.i always start to get edgy when matters go to the last minute (mtfb which was my worst investment ever ran pretty much up to the deadline before they got the killer asteroid CRL not suggesting any similarities, but last minute makes me nervous).i would certainly expect a significant fall if news is bad,but as I've said before ,not much of a bounce if good (probably not a sustained one anyway) but we could be wrong.im afraid i regard the talk of licenses at this stage as just that, talk to put a positive spin on matters ( which i don't find objectionable, just not wise to attach too much weight to it imo) of course they are going to be talking to people but that is a long way from having serious meaningful negotiations.also you make a very valid point re there being more substance after the marketing report and there will be additional substance after the results are revealed(we hope!) so meaningful talks could be starting or developing in the near future. ithink we have to take words like "blockbuster 'with a bucketful of salt.experience in europe has show how overblown and panglossian such descriptions can be.if the latest results are good i think we will grind on in much the same way as we have been and that most probably there will be no license until full FDA approval.will it be a blockbuster after that?who knows,but probably not although it could do very well(the marketing report was pretty encouraging,but get that bucket out again).on the blockbuster front,you have to ask yourself why the name change and brand name change?endurance longevity! not intercourse longevity lol.i don't want to sound too negative and i do think there is a chance we could do reasonably well here,but as always only time will tell.

https://seekingalpha.com/filing/5429582 just incase anyone wants to read the report themselves. there is some other quite interesting stuff in it, some of which serves to emphasise the highly complex nature of rhapsody's business relationships etc

i did say i would post some thoughts on the accounting position re the timelines for revenue etc and although i don't think this will help as such, here are my thoughts. disclaimer I've no accountancy background at all, so all this could be completely wrong.first this is clearly an area of significant complexity and we will only know the position when the accounts have been prepared. that said, the Form10-k annual report filed by realnetworks for year to dec 2020 has some interesting info. it states that in august they (real networks) entered into a support agreement in connection with the execution by napster of a definitive agreement pursuant to which napster will become a wholly owned subsidiary of melody vr. it further states that effective on the execution of the Agreement and Plan of Merger on 25th august, napster was treated as discontinued operations and held-for-sale for accounting and disclosure purposes and subsequently sold in december 2920. as such tapster's operating results and financial condition were recast to conform to this presentation.....i think this partly answers the question about the effective date for revenue.apparently while the effective date for acquisition and disposals of a subsidiary should be the date on which control passes, this can be significantly different from the date in a legal agreement.i think this means that there was a binding, but conditional, agreement on the 25th august under which in effect napster as was was put into a form of accountancy purdah, so that its ongoing performance was kept separate from real networks pending completion of the definitive agreement at the end of december. i therefor expect the napster (as is) accounts to 20th dec 2020 to reflect at least some of the figures for napster as was going forward from 25th august. that said how those figures will translate into new napsters accounts is really one for the accountants .assets acquired in this way have to be subjected to fair value valuations of acquisition and there are many technical accountancy principles to be applied. it seems that there is one particular area which will apply to a company like napster as was.i assume that a large part of its revenue is in the form of pre-payments for services to be provided over a subsequent period of time.(indeed possibly almost all of its revenue is of that nature. the attached link explains the technical accounting difficulties which this type of revenue can experience on acquisitionhttps://www.journalofaccountancy.com/issues/2016/apr/deferred-revenue-accounting-rule-in-acquisition.html i hope new napster is alert to this (they will be I'm sure ), as it seems we could see an ostensible drop in revenue until the accounting anomaly is worked through the system. apologies if this is complete rubbish and if there are any accountants on here it would be good to hear from you.sorry this is bit boring for a friday night.i really should get out more.

evening dougie. i suppose I'm looking at the trial results aspect in this way.if the market was factoring in poor run submittable results, i would have expected the s/p to be considerably lower than it is .therefore my assumption is that decent results are factored in to some extent already.its obviously just my personal assumption that the s/p would be lower if poor results were factored in and i hope i will be pleasantly surprised on the upside.it could just be of course that the s/p is being supported by the vrx news and poor results are expected, but it's all just speculation on my part and no way of knowing.i very much hope you are right and that we get positive results and move up strongly.gla

codder much appreciated thank you.

thanks albert but still no joy.either i shouldn't be allowed anywhere near technology or the website is determined for some reason to keep me in a state of ignorance.suspect it's the former!

thanks lf. unfortunately still can't find the conversion link,but don't worry.i can guess the gist of it and good to see the expansion.

good man LF.i can't read a word of it, but i can see a reference to napster which is all i need, thanks.

hello dougie.it depends what the news is.negative news about FDA trial results would be taken very badly indeed imo.good new ,in the sense of decent submittable results(whatever that may mean)would probably have a modest and probably short lived impact,as I'm assuming reasonably good news is baked in already. could be completely wrong as always. good news re fda and news of a partnership/licensing deal would go down very well,but don't see that happening at all at the moment.imo we will only get licensing deal on full FDA approval,but thats just my view.i don't really see anything else as being a major dial mover either way.the market seems to have ignored entirely the venturex developments,although that could change if regent disposed of the holding.name change and DLI just tinkering around the edges at the moment.so for me the next 3 weeks or so to trial results are pretty key.however dougie as you will have seen my predictive powers are pretty much useless so as usual its just a waiting game.

https://twitter.com/MylesMcNulty/status/1403028413099790341 he doesn't sound too pessimistic reading this one.

morning all.interesting posts all round. in some ways they make the N&g decision(at least in its particular form here) even more puzzling. Djp57 is obviously correct in that matchett would have had to consult others and as well as the ones he mentions, simon cole is very experienced and there would doubtless be external advisors as well .even if matchett is a very despotic type ceo (I've no idea if the is or not) he isn't even the largest shareholder, so not sure how powerful his position is.also one would assume davis,which is the largest shareholder, must have sanctioned the deal,as naps were relying on them for the major finance. even if they weren't bothered from the lender point of view(they get their security regardless of what happens to the share price) they must have been interested from their perspective as the largest shareholder.perhaps it was simply impossible to get less risky finance,e.g. CLNs with safeguards regarding s/p limits etc,which would have been far more acceptable,but it's difficult to believe that a better form could not have been found with the potential of the acquisition and the existing davis involvement, hence my view that it's been a massive misjudgement. anyway we can speculate forever, but as others have said, the prospects here are still very encouraging imo and once we are through to july i hope and expect sentiment will have improved.

evening LF. no worries,but I'm afraid I've got no illuminating thoughts. tbh i have never understood why they went for N&g in the first place.whilst i respect the views of posters who think this was some part of an overall strategy with a view to linking us with one or more of their other customers i personally don't buy that at all.companies seeking strategic partners etc, can presumably find simpler ways of doing it which don't potentially involve the partner being able to acquire 14% or so of your company at a very cheap price in the process. my view, for what it's worth is very simple.naps have made a significant error of judgement,perhaps through getting very poor advice,or perhaps through arrogance or other personality traits of those in charge. they have,in my view,simply miscalculated the potential effect (as i most certainly did when it was first announced).we need to remember that matchett is not as experienced in the financial world as we might have wished, although you would have thought his advisors would be. it's still odd to my mind that if he has been sold a pup, he then goes back to the breeder for another one, even when the unruly and intractable nature of the breed has revealed itself.also why did they need this type of finance in the first place.again i respect the views of those who present it as a cheaper form of finance than high rate interest,but tbh i think that is complete nonsense. certainly seems to be so in the eve,nt even if it looked ok in the contemplation. davis were already a significant holder when N&g came on board .surely their interests were more aligned with napster's than a new outsider and even if they weren't prepared to go for more equity they could perhaps have provided an alternative outside the loan facility already agreed. im just speculating of course and without being party to the discussions we have no way of knowing what the thought processes and considerations were. i think we will get through this and still end up in a relatively good place (very good news re sonos of course), but the road seems have been made somewhat more arduous by N&G's involvement. as to results at end of june, personally i wouldn't expect much. only figures up to 31st dec, so may not even include much from napster (more on this later) and a lot of 2020 was on a free basis. the real and interesting figures won't be out until end of year imo.i agree the decision to accelerate and increase the N&G finance is interesting and perhaps encouraging in a sense,but again we are in the dark as to reasons and the sheer scale of N&G's involvement is, to my mind, quite staggering.as i say just musing and nothing original here I'm afraid..

evening mooney.apologies for not responding sooner, but i will let you have my thoughts re revenue apportionment later tonight or tomorrow, but they won't be very helpful, I'm afraid. before that, however, i would just like to set out what i think is the position re nice and green. according to my calculations, at the 8/4/21 rns they had converted approximately 2.78%, so no reporting requirement at that time. after today's announcement they have converted in total approx 7.36% and will,imo,definitely have to declare if they now hold over 3%.i do not think the exceptions re shares held for security etc apply here. n&g own the converted shares outright not as collateral.they have £2m of loans issued but not yet converted and there is a further £2,160,000 clns to be issued by end of month.what we don't know is what, if any, they have sold.my view is they will have sold some certainly, but even if they have sold a substantial proportion already, they can still become the largest shareholder with what is outstanding.we have to remember that although the balance of the cons will be issued by end of month .n&g do not have to convert the as yet unconverted loans immediately, so we could be in a state of uncertainty for some time.happy to be corrected if mybfigures or reasoning are at fault.putting the figures down in black and white does,i think, put the sheer scale of the exercise in quite some perspective.

presumably the cayman registrar of companies is still on his annual hols! seriously how long does it take to get approval. there is nothing contentious in the new name and it should be a simple matter to say whether is conflicts with any existing names in a matter of minutes.perhaps the situation is more complex than i realise,but it seems to be taking rather a long time (the purpose of this post is to ensure that sods law will produce an announcement tomorrow!)

"having demonstrated great success since initial launch". this is encouraging, but no details of upfront payment etc.not unusual of course, but would have been nice to have some idea of figures. anyway good news without doubt.i am comforted a little by our relationship with sonos,which i regard as a high quality brand.

fair points bignose.time will tell.

bignose that's my worry.i was wondering the same thing.hopefully just being pessimistic based on past experience,but quite a nervous wait now ,imo.has not been any great volume though,which you might expect if a serious leak. fingers crossed.