Member Info for The.Italian

https://www.mobihealthnews.com/news/apples-ecg-feature-can-detect-fib-high-hr-thanks-new-fda-clearance sorry that was the link to the talk.maybe links are not my strongpoint.lolhere is the correct one.

i'm not a fan of posts or posters who post links to articles, which have little or no relevance to the share in question, but which hope to influence sentiment for good or bad, depending on their agenda. howver, as i am entirely confident that nothing i post will ever influence sentiment, particularly as there only 5 or 6 posters on here likely to read it and as this does have a very tenuous relevance to DLI, here is a link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcsrCTlksAA .its relevance is that yesterday i was listening to a talk by polina mamoshina on the 2nd dec (yes i really do lead a quiet life).it was almost entirely unintelligible, due in part to polina's virtually impenetrable russian accent, but mainly because it was highly technical and obviously aimed at those with proper scientific expertise in this field. the only fact i gleaned was that since feb2017 more than 14AI based tools, that is diagnosic tools and algorithms, have been given formal FDA approval. she gave some examples, one of which was Apple's atrial fibrillation detector, which was approved in sept 2018. out of interest i looked at this today and found this link, which shows further FDA approval just a few days after her talk, for an enhanced function. now I'm not suggesting for a moment that DLI are anywhere near producing anything like this and indeed the company has itself said that they are a very long way from anything of this nature.it does ,however, perhaps give some small indication as to the possible direction of travel. so of very limited background interest only, but perhaps not entirely irrelevant.

well dead cross it would certainly be very welcome.fingers crossed!

hello bignose.i do indeed know and understand your opinion. whilst we clearly have somewhat differing perspectives on the dli issue, i entirely accept and agree that its implementation was highly orchestrated and dubious.as you know i was just relieved that it went through,as i felt to have another failure would have been massively damaging. i appreciate there are other ways of looking at it. as a complete non scientific type I'm quite excited(well as excited as i get these days )by the technology and its possible uses,whilst accepting that it may prove to be a faddy and expensive waste of time and money at the end of the day.still not overly confident about the possibility of a licensing deal before formal FDA approval,but obviously i would be delighted if this happened.i do accept that if the fda accept the p11 trial and the questionnaire as a valid measure, then the likelihood of full approval is very high (the one area where we don't really have to worry is that fortacin works and is pretty much as safe as you re going to get) so a license is possible if someone wants to get ahead of the cure.let us hope this happens.

dead cross i cannot answer your question,but it is axactly the kind of question which we should be being asked now and which, imo, helps to put in perspective the potential here.we may be( only time will tell) at the beginning of a truly transformative period for melody.napster. i hope that a very big picture is going to unfold here and as it will clearly take some time i personally have no problem with the lack of frequent updates in the meantime.i understand the frustration of others in the regard but i do not share it.

just to add to heimdal's list, personally i expect news of a further acquisition or something of that nature in the longevity sphere in the next 6 to 9 months.pure speculation of course but it doesn't make sense just to have DLI in that sphere.obviously this may bring with it unwelcome dilution etc, but it might also be s/p enhancing if regent states to be seen as more than just a one trick pony,which is how it has probably been viewed so far.may make it a little less binary.

interesting and helpful summary heimdal.

spot on reflex.

agreed!

https://insights.diligent.com/audit-reporting/understanding-four-types-audit-reports apologies but I've had to post these two links separately as they don't seem to work otherwise. i realise the narrative has started to move on but i feel compelled to address the issue of concern over the listing rules,as with all due respect to heimdal, imo there is absolutely no reason to be concerned at the moment.as i posted yesterday and as bignose has alluded to,reg 13.26 was introduced to deal with the specific perceived mischief of cash shells and backdoor listing. i read a longish narrative piece yesterday about its introduction which made this crystal clear.as is often the way i can't find it today but i have posted a link to the 2019 guidance which makes this pretty clear.whilst the wording might, on the face of it, seem at a stretch to be applicable to regent on the assets aspect,the guidance notes make it clear that this is a qualitative test,not quantitative and that the exchange in effect has a discretion to assess the situation.i think it reasonable to assume that it would have regard to the mischief contemplated by the regulation when considering its applicability,rather than applying it mindlessly to companies in regent's situation.moreover i fail to see how regent could be said to be lacking in assets.yes its extremely cash strapped,but it has assets in the form of fortacin ip etc, as well as the minor assets like venturex.also it has just acquired DLI,which may well have a significant value over time.both the other articles referenced by heimdal focus on the specific situation where a company has had a disclaimed audit option,and as a result will be automatically (i think )suspended and then delisted if it fails to obtain a non disclaimed audit within the specified timeframe. again i have posted a link explaining the various types of audit.you will see that a disclaimed opinion seems to be given in situations where,for example,the auditors feel they have not been given full disosure by the company or have been otherwise unable to produce reliable figures.it is not a qualified opinion.so far as I'm aware regent has not had any audit of that type.i fail therefore to see anything to cause me concern from the perspective of exchange regulation at the current time.we have some real things to worry about,e.g. will the oct sales materialise at a sufficiently high level to provide some form of income or at least a basis for outside interest ( i was pleased to see heimdal suggesting this today,although i am a little less sanguine) to name just one,but hk listing regs is not one of them so far as I'm concerned.sorry for the very long post but i do feel particularly strongly over this.just my opinion ofcourse,but for once I'm not going to qualify it by saying i could be wrong as i don't think i am.

https://www.hkex.com.hk/-/media/HKEX-Market/Listing/Rules-and-Guidance/Interpretation-and-Guidance/Guidance-Letters/gl106_19_preversion.pdf

https://www.hkex.com.hk/-/media/HKEX-Market/Listing/Rules-and-Guidance/Interpretation-and-Guidance/Guidance-Letters/gl106_19_preversion.pdfhttps://insights.diligent.com/audit-reporting/understanding-four-types-audit-reports

nevertheless thanks.

good find KOK.i can't access the detail I'm afraid but the import is clear.i always appreciate a factual post (good or bad)

thank you for that heimdal.that is indeed the exact wording and i would have to bow to your superior knowledge of the HK market (regent is my only holding on this market).however the regulation has been in force for what 17/18 months and although i was worried about regents ability to maintain a listing in the first half of last year, when very little was happening,i am personally not really worried about that now.we do have an operation which is on the point of rolling itself out in europe ,hong kong taiwan etc as well as proceeding with a trial to move into china.in addition we have acquired a separate business (now an asset of course)in DLI. this doesn't seem,to my layman's eye, to be the sort of scenario contemplated by the legislation.j ust my view of course and as i say i do not have local knowledge.

heimdal struggling a bit with this one.what particular concerns do you have regarding the new rule 13.24.from the narrative I've read it looks designed to crack down on backdoor listings and the creation of cash shells.has there been some amendment since its inception in 2019?.i m not familiar with the HK exchange rules so perhaps I've misunderstood.

it also shows ross creek at 70,445,828.

sorry just thought we should have a new header

agreed albert .its important that they try and maintain the revenue as best they can i don't know if some diminution is inevitable given the changes planned,but not necessarily so,so hopefully it ill continue to provide a buttress against expenditure.

hello again henry.i follow all that,but there are so many variable imo.personally i would expect the combined operating costs to be considerably more than 18m,but against that you have napster's revenue,which i would hope will be maintained at least at something like its current level, while development progresses. also davis are very intimately involved now and could for example simply extend the terms of the loan (no doubt at a price).its going be interesting whatever happens and very probably completely different from what we expect. just my opinion.