Member Info for The.Italian

thought cakes were reserved for the M board but happy to see them here!!

well bignose if they have to dispose of veturex to meet the tax bill it would tie in with that scenario but who knows.i view the DBC disposal through the spectrum of my comments a couple of days ago re clever financial engineering.beware the venturex details?

I've changed the header.dont think its a surprise to anyone that motif are going to need some money.seem to recall it was mentioned in an RNS or something.for LTH its still and will remain all about approval.peraonally reasonably confident we will get in the end but just my opinion

I've changed the header.dont think its a surprise to anyone that motif are going to need some money.seem to recall it was mentioned in an RNS or something.for LTH its still and will remain all about approval.peraonally reasonably confident we will get in the end but just my opinion

bignose skim read them a while ago but will have to leave it till later for proper look.initial thoughts quite a bullish tone to the preamble.very little cash at end of december .no statement about how hey are going to pay tax bill.no provision in accounts for the tax(must have come as a big shock to them that they might lose.obviously as a lawyer jg would know that the revenue rarely wins tax cases!lol)

i was pleased with the positive tone of the preface but i expect markets look at substance.maybe i am expecting too much too soon and the big picture is actually better than i am giving it credit for.

just initial thoughts and no doubt wide the mark i expect .will look more closely later

yes odd trades today.two indicative sells each of just over £10k but the s/p has firmed slightly.could have been buys and of course not huge by any means but might indicate background strength.or it may indicate nothing at all!.

Fas Money sorry cannot post link.it skills not up to it.if you google "Post-Complete Response Letter Meetings between FDA and ANDA" you will get it.its dated Dec 2018.Ii only hope i have been looking at the right one as i see it is referring to abbreviated NDAs.hope this helps

mea cupa investing wizard.followingyour last post yesterday i have revisited the requirements for granting the meeting and i completely accept that your assessment of the requirements is more accurate than mine.it seems my view was formed from looking at the draft and older guidelines rather than the dec 2018 guidelines to which i assume you are referring.i cannot understand how i did not see these when researching matters but i did not.i therefor accept that the fact of meeting acceptance is less significant than i suggested (i never actually though it would not be granted) bizarrely the market(even with todays retrace )still seems to have attached more importance to it (or to something) than i would even if i had been correct. other factors may have been in play apart from the announcement of course.once again my apologies to you and anyone else who may have felt included by reference

yep!

in the face of all this negativity i have had a small top up.agree with king short.no real volume just reflective of MMs need to generate some turnover imo

excellent and well considered points ivy. this is the most important meeting in motifs history. need to get it right.personally i have been entirely relaxed about the time scale and have always thought it was going take somewhat longer than the initial announcements suggested.i hope this is a good sign indicative of the best possible preparation etc.not out of the woods yet by a long way but feeling a lot better than yesterday.

wacoy actually i did post to that effect early this morning.it was dismissed as semantics.its not but i didn't have the time to return to the point.im not trying to over egg it .would have been extremely surprised if it had been refused but just think its a small positive if viewed accurately.

intersting and informative post yanis imo

just a point of detail but there have been a couple of posts today stating or suggesting that motif was entitled to a meeting with the FDA. this is not correct.it was entitled to request a meeting but it was entirely open to the FDA to grant or refuse a meeting once it had considered the content of the response package.obviously it would have been very surprising if it had refused a meeting as it had already stated it required further data.however it could have done so and the inference to be drawn is that the response package contained at least sufficient evidence or information for teh FDA to conclude that a meeting was justified.i regarded this as a small positive step although i was surprised by the extent of the market reaction(there may of course be other factors at work in this area) my point is simply that the granting of the meeting was not a forgone conclusion and is evidence that motif have provided something which the FDA think is at least worthy of further consideration.its a small thing and for lths all that really matters is whether we get approval or not (and of course the finance question) but its significance should not be underplayed by suggestions that he meeting was obligatory.i would also just endorse ivy comments in that i personally expect to hear news of the finance arrangements sooner rather than later and that they will give a strong clue as to the future direction.what those arrangements will be i do of course have no idea.

agree with that.what type of arrangement i have no idea

ian think you mean 2 billion spend.but agree with the sentiments.

good man birds eye.obviously they are going to have to do some sort of a cash raise but it may not be the apocalyptic event that one or two have suggested.

back in auction

fair point Jay p.agree with that

afternoon bignose.yes i did a small double take at the reference to eight more etc as i recalled there were far fewer shown when you pointed out a little while ago that most were active and only a couple to go.i didn't look further (is regent fatigue setting in?) i expect we will get completely different figures in the next announcemen!.lol