Member Info for The.Italian

callisto i do not know the exact answer to your question but there is a post by ivyspivey at 19.07 on saturday which discusses this. i realise you may already have seen it.

good idea peter to post the links thanks which makes the position even clearer and should help to allay any unneccesary concerns

pleasure!

if the company does not secure the appointment of a new nomad by 1st feb the company will automatically be suspended from trading on aim.if a new nomad has not been appointed by 4th march the company will be delisted from aim.in effect that means that the company will not be publicly quoted and dealing in its shares will become very difficult if not impossible pending developments on the companys future.all shareholders remain fully entitled to their holdings exactly as before delisting in effect becoming shareholders in a non quoted company.for most shareholders this would mean that they could not trade their holding in practice (there might be the possibility of over the counter trades but this could not be guaranteed) such shareholders would simply have to wait and see what happened to the company e.g. eventual relisting or perhaps being taken fully private by an acquistion for example by a third party.if there was a company acquisition shareholders would be remunerted by the acquisition consideration pro rata to their individual shareholdings.that said there really is nothing to suggest that eqtec will fail to secure a new nomad by the ist feb and indeed the last RNS confirmed that the steps in that direction were proceeding smoothly.to repeat what has been posted previously the resignation of the current nomad is in no way connected to the company itself or concerns over its viability etc.the new appointment should be a formality and i think it unfortunate that posts today have unintentionally given the false impression that there have been fresh negative developments.that is not the case.the statements by platform operators etc are ones made to discharge their obligations to shareholders to safeguard their own positions and do not indicate any negative sentiment towards the company.also talk of shorters is completely misleading and irresponsible.there are no notifiable short positions disclosed in equtec.to talk of shorters gives the false impression that there is an actual shorting campaign by e.g. hedge funds etc.this is simply not the case.trades today amounted to approx £80000 so no great shakes and nothing to cause concern for those who are invested because of the companys potential and its sphere of activity.aimo
closed in eqtec

agree with that bignose.so far as i can see (and like you i haven't gone back over everything) the announcements all refer to recordati as having the licence for europe which i think has to include UK although it is not specifically mentioned.i am not expecting any new licence re uk

not really.obviously nothing in this game is a given but the requirement for new nomad did not arise because of any actions on the part of eqtec so I'm hoping its just a formality.we don't expect to hear anything in this regard for at least two weeks i think so just need to be patient.

ah bunion you have beaten me to the reply.agree with all you say and we also have the promised publicity campaign referred to in posts just before christmas etc so the posts over that period are well worth a read.also bignoses recent update re the FDA trial recruitment.so as you say great deal has actually happened over the last 2 or 3 months

touche bignose! i cannot top that one.

bunion and others be very careful in your choice of vocabulary.i got into a great deal of trouble (obviously i am avoiding the word "bother" so as not to provoke further technical argument) over my use of "postulate".any of us with sesquipedalian tendencies should best restrain them.

good to see some of the old debates and indeed old debating styles again .reminds me of old times(?) ho hum!

good afternoon Bignose.I couldnt agree more.i assume that the EMA is one of the most demanding authorities in the world (indeed based of recent UK political experiences its probably the most difficult and pernickety in the whole world!).the main point i wanted to make quite forcibly was really that whatever their shortcomings over matters in the past i would find it incredible that having got to where they are in europe china et al regent would not be treating the FDA application as of the utmost importance and doing all they can to ensure its success and i am sure they will not be treating the application in a cavalier or lighthearted way.also i don't believe that whatever the strict criteria of the FDA they will look at it completely in isolation from what is happening in the rest of the world and its experiences there .it must have some influence even if only subconsciously.trouble is we are going to have to be patient re USA and hope for positive sales news etc and perhaps ROW developments in the meantime.i hope the expected publicity campaign will bring some s/p improvement also .

alquemie appreciate your response and glad to see you acknowledging that RP have had input and guidance from FDA and for reminding me of some aspects of the questionnaire process which i had forgotten.i do understand that approval is not simple a matter of hitting some pre agreed targets and that the whole process is more subtle and nuanced than that.i am aware for example that criteria can change during the process itself.however whilst acknowledging that nothing will be certain until formal approval itself i would hope and expect that RP and those guiding them on the trial process would have taken steps to try and ensure so far as possible in advance of undertaking the trial that the scope/size of the study has at least a reasonable prospect of satisfying the FDA.if not surely they would just commission a larger study.i realise this may be a simplistic view but surely before undertaking such an important step and finance permitting of course RP would be determined to maximise the likelihood of success.

agreed bignose .we now have a better potential handle on progress.

alquemie i appreciate your clarification and your comments re multiple trial sites are very much what i would have expected.what puzzles me is the suggestion that the primary outcome criteria of one degree or greater improvement may not be sufficient to satisfy fda requirements.i would have assumed that prior to commissioning the study regent would at least have had some discussion with fda to have their preliminary views as to what criteria the trial would need to satisfy as otherwise whey would at least to my unknowlegable eye be going into the trial "blind" as it were.one small pharma in which i am invested has had very considerable guidance from the fda in formulating its trial for fda approval (admittedly in a completely different sphere of drug applicability) and i would be surprised if some advance guidance was not provided to would be applicants.of course i may be completely wrong or have misunderstood matters but i hope not

steadily increasing ask.suggests further upward movement to me.

ok thanks for link.i can see they are simply various locations for the original estimated 100 couples so no change of substance but at least the website seems to be being updated since my previous visits

bignose thanks for posting this information.not sure i understand its significance.does it mean that there are actually 9 potential trial venues as opposed to the one venue i previously understood and if so does it indicate that the the scale of the trial is significantly larger than previously believed or do they simple recruit the initial target (i haven't checked back but i think it was 100 couples) group from several sites?if it is an indication of a larger trial group i would see that as potential quite positive rather than the "shoestring" approach suggested by alquemie.if you can elaborate at all it would be appreciated as i entirely agree with your and others thoughts re us market as potentially the most significant albeit some way off

theeearlgrey for once a sensible and insightful post!

ebioss currently up just under 14%.is it relevant?no idea but its a fact and may be of interest to some

plenty of activity this morning.92 trades so far.some profit taking no doubt from last weeks rise but overall its very encouraging to see an increased level of interest.