Member Info for urbansea89

Good job. High quality, solid and honest representation of progress. No over-promising. Very happy with this and very re-assured.

If you are reading, please confirm that we are no longer paying for your scaled up diagnostics team and the related hires that were made in terms of sales, marketing and distribution. I assume this has already been taken care of? Appreciate it didn’t come off as you’d hoped but keen to know that the overhead has been culled swiftly and according to the new circumstances. Be good to know that’s of course already in hand.

A fair assessment and I agree we could reach a valuation of that height or more and of course other posters have applauded our leader on his great ability as a scientist, which I don’t deny but I do so feel that he and his complicits have, on the way, danced us a tune.
I would not have taken part, nor would anyone else, if we’d been briefed properly on the risk and reward, which we were not.

Icecool, well said. I’m not keen on making SP predictions for the main reason that I’m generally hugely wrong, I am though very keen on the Company providing us with a true and consistent narrative upon which we can base our financial decisions, which they have not done.

I’d expect our CEO to lead in every aspect of our management team: product and development, sales, finance, PR and comms etc. Our CEO has been poor on most of these, maybe all. He hasn’t done any of this well.

Who the hell is doing their job on the board and holding him to account, because it’s not been a job well done in any conceivable way, either by him
or those who are supposed to overview him on our behalf. It’s been an embarrassment. The non execs have a duty, are trained, certified and will be held to account. We know who they are and what they are supposed to have done. They haven’t done the job that we are paying them for.

With regards Ava, I had some confidence, until our CEO bottled out in that last ridiculous video and asked his colleague to lead the presentation. Fiona M did a good job because he told her to but she provided a slightly different narrative to the one we had been previously given by AL. If I’d heard Fiona’s story from the onset, I’d have taken a different view and would have taken a different investment decision. I’ve made my decisions, at every stage, based on the information the Company has provided.

It’s not good enough and not enough for us as investors to rely on acrimonious posts to solve the problem which needs urgent intervention.

I think AS has been provided half truths and not been straight with the market. Now that he has so nonchalantly dismissed our LFDs, what he really should do is to tell us how he plans to cut a large payroll cost out of our diagnostics, or show us a viable set of achievable goals and targets over the next 6 months, or he should leave along with the diagnostic team.
Up to now he’s given us a load of waffle and vague reasons for why things have not happened.
I don’t think AS should be leading this business through therapeutics. He has shot all of his credibility and we need a star CEO who can take charge and realise the huge potential we still have.

Thanks Sorcerer, very interesting.

I’d be interested to know what Michael Vinegrad thought of yesterday’s interview. Presumably he makes some contribution in steering these types of comms.
I’d also like to know how David Wilson and team are doing these days. Would be happy to see the back of them and properly concentrate on matters in hand.

Apologies for covering old ground but I though it best to soak up yesterday before posting.

In my opinion the SP has radically suffered from a disappointing and confused presentation from Alistair and Fiona McLaughlin, it was truly awful. It lacked preparation and understanding and respect for us as private investors. I have watched again and cringed.

The ease in which Alistair tossed away our diagnostic business that he’d previously sold to us and then referred us to his relatively new hire Fiona was cowardly from a CEO. He should have taken leadership. He is becoming a total lightweight.

I’d more likely accept the wipe out, if he’d demonstrated some real confidence in the therapeutic programme, which he was vague about. McLaughlin rightly wasn’t being drawn into clear responses on the trial, because she simply didn’t know what she could say, it’s not her job to prop the SP. It was unfairly dropped on her. Alistair has a lot more to gain than she has. He is becoming a total blagger and he’s never needed to be.

I’ve lost a great deal of respect and trust in Alistair. I’m sticking cos I’m too far in and hoping it will be more positive than the vague responses that Fiona McLaughlin delivered.

In some ways I’m not surprised as I’ve not ever seen a sound and confident presentation from this Company. It’s what I’ve become used to. Despite the usual comms shambles, I’m gonna punish myself for some more, it still could be a life changing punt in every way.

Still a bit overwhelmed by this morning’s news. Haven’t felt this excited about our Company for some time. Been getting pretty ****&d off with them but now feeling we’re right back on the bridle, 3 furlongs out.
Of course a long way to go but this was quite special.

I know you were. The new Frankel movie out soon. Jeremy Irons plays Henry. Can’t wait.

:) sure can Jackester.

Possibly the best RNS in 2 years, could go all the way.
Won’t get interference from politics or PD, sentiment etc. Also US trials looming. At long last something real and to get seriously excited about.

Big step forward. Great news

Thanks Bella. SPACs are ok for some models but they are heavily weighted for a SPAC founder who picks up 25% of the acquired assets in the SPAC. Not sure we’d want to sell to a SPAC, assuming we had a say so.
I’m really hoping we’d be better than that.
Perhaps a SPAC might be better consolidating eg Deep Verge, Abingdon and Omega into one pot. Maybe one or two others.

Ollyj, I think anything is possible with this lot. They could conceivably be road-showing to get more in for the same old prophet’s story, I don’t really trust them anymore and wouldn’t be surprised if they were of this mind.

I am in heavily and pretty unhappy about it now. I perceive it as an 8-1 shot paying 100-1+ from where we are, if it’s a winner. It’s a total bet now but possibly a still a stunner and I do still like this bet.

I don’t think a marginal success on AVA will pull it off, it needs to be significantly more. I am confused by the lack of confidence in the initial readings/lack of Sp + leaks etc. I don’t really know how these things work, maybe a huge RNS with a 70-80% upside reading or maybe we’ll wait a long time with numbers being crunched and spun to perpetuate the programme.

I think we’ll know sooner than we hear about party gate. I do hate this and never want to put myself into something like this again.

I’m no disagreeing with you, I just take a different experience from the journey and on balance of news, interpreting a different outcome, a very good one. You and I will be very happy, as will we all. Onwards and upwards.

You may be right Ndn71 and I’m sure your scenario has crossed minds but, on the other hand, should one be holding the most compelling and ground breaking data, one would sensibly cross check every detail and consider how it should be divulged and then plot a controlled release which isn’t then open for rebuttal by people with a contrarian agenda. Who knows, but certainly I don’t think either you nor I do for now.

I take a positive view on it, otherwise I wouldn’t have got involved in the first place. Happy to let this be done properly and for the Company to take the advice of experts on how to release the news of real hope for what was a previously a destructive treatment.

Their

Was a good RNS, no doubt, even though the ambiguity door was left slightly open, as is there way. Glad to be in and sticking for the big one for sure. Hugely encouraging.

Thanks Ophidian, good to have a sense of where things may have gone wrong up to now and gives us a clue, without the Company providing any explanation, as to what the likelihood may or may not be of a turnaround.