Member Info for The_Paladin

At the time of Dr. Mankowski's appointment we were informed he had worked with the Company as acting CMO and a clinical trials consultant since 2018. Consequently, he was part of the team guiding the company's clinical trials - success, and failures - over the last six years. His appointment tells us nothing more than the fact that the company chose to promote him to a permanent senior position.

I am not pinning any future hope on this appointment. Nothing of any value to investors has happened since the Sprinter demise, during which Dr. Mankowski has worked closely with the company as a consultant. However, all serious investors like myself will no doubt be happy to learn of any contribution from our CMO in bringing about the necessary planning and funding to launch the awaited P2 MV trial.

If we choose to believe Simon Shaw’s most recent Chairman’s statement, then we should be hearing something very soon. Apparently Synairgen have made a complete U-turn on the plans announced in the 2023 AGM. This is hardly surprising as these were far too ambitious for a tiny biopharmaceutical company with limited resources.

It seems that the MV strategy is based on the Sprinter deep dive and Activ-2 data sets? Presumably on other company data in addition?

The company have not announced anything of significance to investors in 30 months. Their communication has been at the bare minimum level for 12 months - mostly mandatory RNS statements.

Should they disappoint us yet again this time around, I fear that they may well have been stringing us along , with nothing important in the locker, since the Sprinter trial demise. I hope for the best, but am prepared for the worst!

“ Synairgen’s relentless focus in the year has been on applying the insights gained from 2020/21 to determine the best path forward for clinical development of its investigational drug, SNG001, for severe viral lung infections. This was conducted amidst the backdrop of a challenging year for the biotech sector; we have regained momentum and stand on the verge of embarking on a Phase 2 trial in patients who are mechanically ventilated as a result of a respiratory viral infection, subject to finalising the trial financing plan. We have selected this population because it has a high unmet need, represents a significant commercial opportunity, patients are readily identifiable, and the clinical path is clear. We look forward to communicating the trial design and associated financing plan.”

Simon Shaw, June 2024.

Your arguments are perfectly feasible pmjh. For the time being they are in the realm of future possibilities.

However, there is is no explanation as to why Synairgen chose to list its link to the UNIVERSAL studies as an operational highlight? As we both separately hypothesised, this might well lead to a future development, which in turn could be of material benefit to Synairgen? This is a possibility for the time being, nothing more.

For the time being, I would prefer the company to remain fully focused on acquiring the necessary funding to run the P2 MV trial. Nothing else matters until they are a viable concern again,

Thank you Spacman. That makes a lot of sense. Until I receive concrete evidence to the contrary, I will continue to believe that Synairgen’s link to the UNIVERSAL studies is minor, at best.

Why did Synairgen list their involvement in the UNIVERSAL trial amidst their recent operational highlights for the last year? I recall from two years ago that their involvement wasn’t intended to be significant.

https://www.synairgen.com/media/company-announce-collaboration-on-universal-trial

“Viral testing equipment already owned by Synairgen and nursing staff at the Southampton clinical trial site are being provided by Synairgen”

The trial site acknowledges Synairgen’s contribution.

https://www.southampton.ac.uk/ctu/trialportfolio/listoftrials/universal.page

“This trial is funded by Jansen pharmaceuticals with support in kind from Synairgen Ltd.”

Pedro Rodriguez, whose LinkedIn profile identifies him as a Clinical Research Nurse Manager and Junior Project Manager at Synairgen was recently included as one of the contributors to a publication which arose from the UNIVERSAL study?

I still don’t understand why some of our forum contributors attach such importance to Synairgen’s tenuous links to the UNIVERSAL study? My best interpretation is that the data from that study will assist Synairgen in the future? Synairgen’s recent COPD publication suggests that our treatment merits further trialling with that disease, which links significantly to the UNIVERSAL data?

Before any of that is possible Synairgen is seriously in need of a relaunch. It is now nearly thirty months without significant progress being made? Our hopes are pinned on the company achieving funding for the proposed P2 MV trial. The company simply cannot afford to allow their latest proposed strategy to dither for much longer without an announcement of funding for the aforementioned trial. They need to regain momentum, and make real progress imminently if they want to maintain the company as a viable business.

"The inability of people to wait for an update is quite astonishing."

I recall that we waited for more than 9 months for an update on the progress with the two company allegedly funded P2 trials utilising stratification and AI in their planning. It turned out that neither trial was achievable. Investors were informed about this in the last few days of the H1 2024 (+ 3 months of H2 2023) deadline.

Subsequently, we have been presented with a less impressive unfunded trial scenario - to proceed next Winter? We are currently enjoying the hottest days of Summer.

Perhaps an investor's impatience isn't inappropriate when one considers the manner in which this company are extending their time to a trial, with exceptionally high remuneration for their senior staff, while achieving nothing of value. The company's share price has been closely correlated to the remaining P3 trial capital for 30 months, and continues to decline.

How much longer does any reasonable person expect investors to remain patient with the company's abject lack of progress?

“without a trial they basically just wind the funds down to 2026.”

Surely investors would find this scenario unacceptable dippfs? The company have already spent 30 months, and achieved little else, in bringing all their data from previous trials and elsewhere to the fore. They are unlikely to achieve more from that process.

It is high time for the BOD to inform investors that some real progress has been achieved by announcing the start of a fully funded MV trial this Winter, as described in their recent belated statement. In addition, an AGM needs to be scheduled so that investors can have an opportunity to ask questions about the strategy.

We have had enough ducking and diving from the CEO and Board. It is high time for them to finally get on with the task of relaunching the company.

Doc.D

Yes they are. NDF is an inappropriate term in the sense that dilution is not avoided in either scenario, but merely postponed.

However, the postponement means that the lender eventually receives a smaller fraction of the company’s assets. I can only presume that the postponement would result in an increase in the overall return to the lender?

As an investor, none of this concerns me too much. The increase that I seek is an increase in the share price to a level where I can recover a reasonable proportion of my original investment.

The company’s strategy and its funding is a means to an end as far as I am concerned. My main concern lies with the fact that the company have not been able to implement and fund an SNG001 recovery strategy in nearly 30 months!

Currently there is no detail whatsoever relating to the MV trial, no clarification regarding its funding, and no date set for the long overdue AGM. Investors might be forgiven for questioning the company’s competence?

Non dilutive funding is possible. It is often an option taken up by early stage companies. It can be implemented by various means including:

The use of convertible debt, which allows investors to convert their investment into equity at a later date.

Another method is to use revenue-based financing, which allows companies to sell a portion of their future revenues in exchange for capital.

The company receiving the loan preserves its equity in the short term. However, some dilution may be incurred later when the debt is repaid.

Back to Synairgen, is it possible that the recent departure from normal company protocols might be due to the fact that negotiations to secure funding of this nature are underway?

Investors now need a full update on what, if anything, is happening? The fact that the company has sufficient remaining Sprinter trial capital to continue with its day to day running until the beginning of 2026 is obvious and meaningless.

We were misled at the last AGM to believe that trials employing stratification techniques to select the patient cohort were being planned to commence during the first half of this year. This did not happen, and we were presented with a different trial scenario, literally at the very last second of the nine months of “ stratification trial planning”.

Investors could not be blamed for thinking that the company was making up its strategy on the hoof ?

All this could be refuted by an announcement to clarify when the MV trials are due to commence (next Winter is too vague, as was H1 2024, and only creates more doubt in the minds of investors), and how they will be funded.

Synairgen surely cannot continue postpone this announcement, and their AGM date for much longer? It is high time for them to bring the 30 month stasis, without any discernible progress being made, to a conclusion!

GLALTIs.

From politics to some philosophical thought.

Having spent some time on Blinkist to gather some ideas on stoicism for a presentation, I subsequently found this contribution from ‘semantic’ on another share forum

“There are three key variables, inputs (costs), outputs (profits), and a third, the most important variable for this business, namely time.

Investors are concerned that there have been no concrete updates since 2022, but each successive day is a day nearer to news, and possibly closer to a positive development in the progress of our current strategy.

There hasn’t been any measurable progress for 30 months. How likely is it that two and half years of development would have increased the value of the business as compared to reducing it? What are the odds that 30 months of “working hard” might result in a final diminution in the company’s value as opposed to an increase?

The worst outcome for investors from waiting for 30 months would undoubtedly be that the company could become insolvent? That is the absolute worst result.

If one then considers the range of positive outcomes, there is currently plenty of scope for progress. It is a matter of weighted conjecture, i.e. your guess is as good as anyone else’s as to what might transpire? How much is the current share price discounted when compared with the resulting price from each possible outcome?”

Not entirely stoic, but a philosophical, glass half full approach, and, in my opinion, one that is worth embracing in our current uncertain situation.

GLALTIs

Ab4.

Agreed that TD has defended the company’s strategy in the past. He has also made some rather unpleasant comments about my contributions on more than one occasion. Although I have responded with like for like comments, and accused him of being a company stooge, I no longer believe that to be the case.

More than obvious stooges on other share fora are polite to other investors, and even cajole them in a disguised attempt to keep them on board. TD has attempted to offer rationale in defence of company policy, but has all but cursed those who are not in agreement, including myself.

You on the other hand have shown your face today when, very unusually, there is a small flurry of trading activity. Why bother, when you are no longer invested? Hmmmm?

On the last occasion you volunteered a comment in which you came across as a Boo-hiss villain from a pantomime trying to frighten small children. At the same time you made some rude comments about other contributors including TD. This is why I successfully requested the cancellation of your very peculiar post.

By all means continue with your obvious scaremongering Ab4. I doubt whether anyone has resorted to hiding behind their sofa yet? That may yet transpire if Synairgen don’t get a move on soon? Until then, continue if you must. Most sensible investors are not being put off by your so obvious tactics.

GLALTIs.

As promised, a brief word to inform fellow contributors that I finally received a reply to my e-mail late this afternoon. My communication made a brief reference to the possibility of Synairgen de-listing?

As well as sending an e-mail directly to Synairgen, I also wrote to Consilium. I didn’t expect a reply from the company, but wanted to bring up the delisting issue. In all likelihood, it didn’t venture further than the screen of a lower tier employee, who most probably disregarded it at source?

When I didn’t receive a reply from Consilium, I resent the same e-mail on consecutive days, and finally received a response @ 17:22 today. It was identical to the replies to jonnyboy33 and to MrCosts.

In common with other Synairgen responses, it merely parrots the very basic information already issued by the company, without any reference to timing or deadlines.

In short, I am still very much in the dark as to what the future might hold for Synairgen? We do not have anywhere near sufficient information to work anything out. Moreover, previous “updates” supplied by the company have been notoriously inaccurate.

GLALTIs.

I have forwarded the following message to the company.

25 July, 2024.

Dear Madam/Sir,

As a Synairgen retail investor, I am concerned that I haven’t yet been informed about the 2024 AGM date.

Company Law requires an AGM to be held each year, and not more than 15 months after the previous AGM. Further, a public company is required to hold an AGM within 6 months of its financial year-end.

I am concerned that Synairgen is not complying with these corporate guidance procedures. Further do retail investors have anything to fear from the latter? For example, are you planning to delist the company?

My thanks in advance for your reply.

Kind regards,

Thank you for the correction Doc.D. The information in that guide is misleading.

“Section 336: Public companies: annual general meeting

Where section 366 required an AGM to be held each year and not more than 15 months after the previous AGM, a public company will now be required to hold an AGM within 6 months of its financial year-end.”

I will write to Synairgen this morning in an attempt to find out why they are not complying with corporate guidance procedures? Further, I will ask whether retail investors have anything to fear from their non compliance?

I will post the reply should I receive one? I should add that I haven’t received a reply to my questions since the departure of Brooke Clarke.

Below is a link to the definitive guide to AGMs in plain English. As Spacman previously informed us,

“ A company must hold an AGM every calendar year. The length of time between one AGM and the next cannot be more than 15 months.”

Synairgen’s last AGM was held on 29 June, 2023. The next AGM will need to be scheduled within 15 months of that date.

29 September 2024 falls on a Sunday. Presumably, Synairgen will need to arrange this year’s AGM on Friday 27 September, or earlier, in order to comply with company regulations.

https://www.odce.ie/Portals/0/Documents/Media%20and%20Publications/Publications/Quick%20Guides/AGM_29_.pdf

BertieBassett.

semantic has answered your question in that response. I have encountered similar eloquent company apologists on other LSE share fora.

I see no harm here, provided the share price recovers from the deliberate mauling inflicted upon it by a covetous and selfish individual earlier this year.

GLALTIs.

We need the announcement of a fully financed MV trial imminently. This needs to be followed by an AGM.

The pointless company rhetoric of the last 29 months has to cease. We have been spun several lines about platform trials, discussions with partners, and more recently sophisticated state of the art trial planning.

The plan B mentioned in the recent company statement doesn’t exist. It has taken the company nearly 30 months to analyse all its data and to arrange a repeat of its in vitro studies. Entering a state of hybernation to gather more data, with top heavy staff remuneration taking up most of the company’s residual capital, doesn’t add up.

We have been led up a long garden path since Feb 2022. A financed P2 trial may yet yield a solution, and eventually relaunch the company. There is no doubt though that Synairgen is in its last chance territory.

Despite the not entirely unexpected news today, the oddest part of the day from my perspective has been the continued liquidity of Synairgen shares?

Apart from the negotiated trades only phase at the very start of the day, it has been possible to potentially sell all my shares in a single trade since then. The sell price has declined from 4.3p to 3.71p during the day, but there are apparently buyers in place ready to absorb a not unsubstantial trade?

I intend to remain with my investment, although I regret not selling @ 30p+ following the P3 trial. TFG Holdings’ buying at the time led me to believe that there were opportunities for the company to pursue? Whether this is still possible remains to be seen?

Signing off for the foreseeable future. If past precedent is anything to go by, we are unlikely to receive an update for some time.

My best wishes to all long term investors. I am sorry that we all got carried away by an investment, which ultimately didn’t merit our support.

Roughly 1% of the company's shares were traded up to 10:30 with the buys:sells ratio approximately 2:3. Could the buyers be traders looking for a bounce for small gains in the coming trading days?

The CEO's Proactive interview didn't contain any mention of the precise stratified data analysis that we were expecting as a precursor to future trialling? Instead, trials are to be conducted on the basis of a cruder analysis. This trial path and rationale could have been identified and conducted long before now. Did Synairgen really need to appoint a CMO for this?

What is less explicit is the funding route to enable this trial to commence? It is apparent that investors were misled when informed last September that the company had sufficient funds to enable P2 trials to be conducted during H1, 2024? Is the remaining cash position sufficient, or will the company need to raise funds? This is unclear from this morning's update. Were the CFO and Financial Controller appointed for this? It hardly seems likely!

What has emerged for me from this morning's update is that the company has meandered for 28 months without making a great deal of progress. A more proactive CEO and BOD would most likely have achieved far more during that time. After delaying the update until virtually the final hours of the stipulated H2 period, the CEO is now looking at potentially another 10 months in which to conduct a trial? Surely the company's lack of progress since the P3 trial outcome will be challenged during the next AGM, when this is finally scheduled?

“By the way, trading of SNG is currently suspended on IG”

My broker will only execute a sale “by negotiated trade”. This probably means that there is a flurry of panicking investors pressing the sell button, with far fewer buyers attempting to buy the broker’s stock reserve.

The RNS has not been well received, and the current quoted stock price is 4.3p. The company is being valued at its probable remaining cash reserves. As before, no value is being attributed to its IP or trial data.

Sadly, the company have achieved nothing of perceived benefit since Feb 2022, using the share price decline as a crude indicator.

The major area of concern for me is how TFG Holdings will react to today’s statement? Like myself, they may have written off this investment, and are holding in the hope of some amelioration to our current dire position.