Member Info for The.Italian

i suspect that a degree of scepticism may have crept in(probably unjustifiably) due to the fact that no details of contract size have been given.no doubt there are sound commercial reasons for not disclosing but cynics will take the view that if very good news the detail would have been given and ergo the value is actually very small.who knows but my view is that either way its a very significant milestone.despite this view i have been reducing my holding over the week simply because i am well in profit and i am of the school of thought that its never a profit until its in the bank (rather than its not a loss until you sell which long experience has taught me is the maxim most likely to lose you money in the long term) just my opinion and each to their own of course.

can't wait!

agreed oiltrder.i bought more this morning even though i have what is for me quite a large holding already..

agree with that markshares.basically confirmation and encouragement about future developments.anything price sensitive will need runs but should be supportive of s/p in any event

L2 looking stronger now suggesting upturn.imo

level 2...bid just gone back up to 1.6 but otherwise neutral imo

MR seemed a clear intention to suggest failure on the part of regent to deliver on its promises.hence the view expressed that that there was ill will towards mellon and/or Regent.could be reading too much into it but certainly comes across like that.agree d its very odd.

agreed kingshott.even if there is no obviously direct relatioship its very good to see our main shareholder (main by quite some margin) being the subject of investor confidence (not to mention the possibility of additional business for eqtec)

norfolk no need to apologise.my post was not directed at anyone in particular and to be honest with the number of posts today its hard to keep track of the threads.no doubt we all hope for the upward trend to continue

we have a nomad. the current nomad remains in place until 7AM on the lst Febuary.read the relevant RNS.personally i would now put the chance of a new nomad not being appointed before then as between zero and 0.001.absolutely no way we would we have had todays RNS if there was any chance of non appointment of nomad.this point has been done to death .constant references to it are either mischievous or ill informed.aimo

i have to agree with that strategy day trader67.personally i agreed with those posters who have sought to ascribe a risk weighting to the seeming binary choice between approval and non approval and whilst i wouldn't try to do this in a precise mathematical way as a broad brush approach it clearly favours continued holding .all just my option of course

bunion i completely agree.if the pr firm was involved( i suspect it was not) then it could and should have ensured that a better job done.I accept that it may be difficult to counter jounatistic incompetence or prejudice but this what you hire a pr firm for to ensure that the best possible spin is put on things . thats its job.If they were nor involved then why not? this is a critically important development which needs the most careful and competent handling.

exactly what I'm thinking the earl grey,so I've changed the thread to something more reflective of reality!

excellent post bignose thank you.sounds like youve been in touch with jamie and if so well done.i did think the ostensible sales figure looked very odd and glad to hear there will be revisions to article.

i have been reading the posts re valuation with interest.aplogies if my question is naive or simplistic but do the models factor in the effect of the terms of the individual marketing/licence agreements?supposing you had two identically valuable ABs which would each potentially achieve the exact same market sales in number and value but one is marketed under a very favourable licence for the developer and the other under a much less favourable agreement.presumably the developers would the have different values ascribed to them.irealize i may have completely misunderstood matters but i suppose what i am saying is that the terms the licence /prtnership agreement (and hoped for future ones) are really the key determinant to future value.i have no specialist pharma or commercial knowledge in this area so hope i am nothing being overly simplistic in asking this and I'm certainly not suggesting motif wont achieve a very high valuation in due course (i think it will)

have been out most of day but decided to re read article and i have to say my second impression is even worse than first time.no point repeating negatives but it really is pretty dire stuff.let us hope the other articles are not in the same vein and of the same quality level.may well not be jamies fault in fairness as it does seem to be biased against regent which presumably was not jamies wish or intention

looking very strong now for a move back up.

my thoughts exacty bignose.also and this may just be me reading too much in,i felt there was the slight implication in tone that regent was a failed former mining company which was now having a go at saving itself by marketing a none too impressive pharma product..just my personal reading and it doesn't seem to have had any impact on hk market today which as i post has seen hardly any trades and a tiny sp rise.still seems to me that sales figures are the next big key.aimo

agree with that. I1219. personally I'm not expecting the announcement until just before the end of january.just my view of course

no not seen it thanks for posting.my initial reaction is it publicity of a sort but perhaps not exactly what we might have hoped.it doesn't seem to present regent in a very good light.just my initial reaction and would be interested to hear what others think.im not sure i subscribe to the view that all publicity is good publicity.i once worked for a largish firm when the then senior partner responded to reports of the firms financial difficulties by saying the only thing worse than being talked about was not being talked about.no doubt he remained proud of this would be apercu for the next three months ....right up until the firm went into administration with debts of astronomical proportions!!
i hasten to say I'm not putting regent in the same boat and i hope the report does stimulate some investor interest .we will see.