We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4d Pharma Plc | LSE:DDDD | London | Ordinary Share | GB00BJL5BR07 | ORD 0.25P |
| Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 16.36 | 0.00 | 01:00:00 |
| Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - |
| Last Trade Time | Trade Type | Trade Size | Trade Price | Currency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | O | 0 | 16.36 | GBX |
4d Pharma (DDDD) Share Charts1 Year 4d Pharma Chart |
|
1 Month 4d Pharma Chart |
Intraday 4d Pharma Chart |
| Date | Time | Title | Posts |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17/2/2024 | 13:26 | 4D Pharma Research Thread | 7,893 |
| 02/3/2023 | 18:11 | 4D Pharma 2018 - from Ј2 back up to Ј10+ | 30,608 |
| 16/2/2023 | 11:36 | 4d Pharma | 601 |
| 25/6/2022 | 20:21 | MILLSTONE INVESTOR | 5 |
| 06/2/2022 | 06:16 | 4D Pharma - Red Hot Buy - The Recovery Thread | 419 |
| Trade Time | Trade Price | Trade Size | Trade Value | Trade Type |
|---|
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 17/2/2023 18:30 by amaretto1 Just to add..... Shareholders still own DDDD .... not Arm !! A relevant point that needs to be raised is how much did the debt cost off Oxford .....Very important.... because that's the figure DDDD would owe ARM !! |
Posted at 17/2/2023 18:26 by amaretto1 nigel how many times do i have to constantly correct you ? It's becoming tiresome.... seriously. If it's not on here it's on the POLX thread .... u need to stop being so clever ....DDDD own all the IP ...which is patented around the world ... Check out DDDD pattent catalogue. The Administrators are supposed to get the best price !! We will see |
Posted at 16/2/2023 10:12 by amaretto1 A American hedge fund takes on the debt DDDD liabilities of another American hedge fund ....So they have now put themselves in the position of secured creditor .. first in line to DDDD assets. Administrators imo are also in the mix. Very quick to delist the company. Now what about the possible milestone payments from Merck ? Private investors have been Conned !! |
Posted at 14/2/2023 14:10 by amaretto1 All you got to think about is the Market Capital of the company....They have swapped the debt for equity...... it's 15 million !!!This can be paid off .... without huge dilution.......it's up to A ..How they go forward with this ....If for example 15 to 20 million was injected in from Merck ... what then ? These DDDD leads could be worth 100s of millions .... share price then ? |
Posted at 13/2/2023 20:43 by amaretto1 DDDD made the application on the 16th January to the court. The administrators gave till Friday to submit all outstanding debts owed by DDDD of over 1000 pounds. A Routine step.Not sure if any lodged.The loan company are in talks with the Court ... administrators and DDDD Pharma..... We may need a extension, which imo the loan provider will give. |
Posted at 13/2/2023 09:37 by amaretto1 If one of these payments comes in ..Under the loan structure, the loan would have to be 50 percent repaid.Imo the whole amount will be. This is all dependent on and if A want to ... it's up to them. But it would give DDDD a completely new financial structure....Not only have they got a 12 month cash runway already ......You can all work out ..what the share price could and would achieve ! |
Posted at 05/12/2022 16:10 by amaretto1 This is huge news for this drug approach regarding Microbiome !! If we had been listed it would have sent the share price in to orbit ...Sadly we have probably missed the boat and are now looking for a tossed in ring from the harbour ...Absolute criminal what's happened with DDDD |
Posted at 07/9/2022 09:31 by 1airbag Podium, agree it does all seem suspicious but BOD would have had to sacrifice large chunks of their own money if this was the intention. That is a risky game to play for BOD which is why I think they were simply naive.I think they got caught out by the bear market in BioTechs. They never foresaw such a destruction in Share price, they simply didn't have this on their radar. They ploughed more of their own money in at 110p. They really thought share price was going to go through the roof on NASDAQ launch. In their minds they were better than Seres and that firm was valued at way more. But worse than that, as the share price was on the way down they were blinkered into not issuing more shares for fear of diluting their own holdings. Clearly the market didn't believe the story. Hopefully one day we will actually find out if the science works. |
Posted at 27/6/2022 19:46 by sf5 Comments today from Graham Neary's free email:''On Friday, the company’s shares were suspended. It was revealed that a creditor had chosen to put the company into administration. The fat lady hasn’t sung just yet: a range of outcomes is possible, and existing shareholders might not lose 100% of their investment. But losing 100% of their investment appears to be, by a wide margin, the most likely outcome. I’ve been there, done that and bought the t-shirt. I’ve lost 100% on an investment before. I’ve also owned several companies which would have resulted in a total loss, if I had not come to my senses earlier. Fortunately, these experiences happened quite early in my investing career. I paid for my investing education in this way, and have not needed to pay for any additional tuition just yet. But that doesn’t help you very much, if you’ve just lost 100% on DDDD. All I can say is: you will use this experience in the future. Some former DDDD shareholders will choose not to get involved in individual stocks again. For them, that will be the right decision. Some will abandon pharma stocks. Some will develop a greater interest in mature, profitable companies. And some will simply reduce the size of their “mad money” portfolio - the portion of their savings that they earmarked for entertainment! But for each person, the pain of loss will help to shape their future investment strategy. I’ve checked my archives, and I don’t think I’ve ever written a word about DDDD before. So I’m not claiming to be a guru who saw this coming. However, there are good reasons why I’ve never written about DDDD before, which I can spot instantly: Pharma - this is a notoriously difficult sector. Remember that even the experts often fail to predict the results from drug trials, and fail to predict whether or not a medicine will be approved. If the scientific experts can’t do it, how can a layperson? Surviving in the investment field has a lot to do with knowing what you don’t know. I know that I can’t predict the future of medicine, so I simply stay away. Now if somebody has been burned in DDDD but still wants to invest in the pharma space, the good news is that there are plenty of large, profitable companies they can choose from. Less exciting, but much easier to sleep at night! Zero revenues - investing in pre-revenue companies has a lot in common with investing in lottery tickets. One or two of them will succeed and, if you’re lucky, they will pay for all the others. DDDD’s revenues weren’t quite zero (c. £500k annually). But they were effectively zero, relative to $20m of R&D spending annually, and $7m in administrative expenses. In its most recent results statement, the company said: To date we have not generated significant revenue, and we do not expect to generate significant revenues from the sale of our product candidates in the near future. There was not even the prospect of significant revenues being generated soon. Anybody invested in a company that has effectively zero sales, and has no near-term prospect of making any sales, needs to understand the nature of the risk they are taking. Personally, I don’t feel comfortable investing in companies that aren’t making a profit. But investing in companies that don’t even make revenue - that’s a special category of risk! Debt/Balance sheet - for many years, I’ve suggested that investors should check the going concern statement in the annual report of their companies. It’s a simple check that only takes a minute. “Going concern” is mentioned 27 times in the most recent annual report from 4D Pharma. The report is unambiguous in its message (I have added the bolding below): The Directors are continuing to explore sources of finance available to the Group and have a reasonable expectation that they will be able to secure sufficient cash inflows into the Group to continue its activities for not less than 12 months from the date of approval of these accounts. They have therefore prepared the financial statements on a going concern basis. Because the additional finance is not committed at the date of approval of these financial statements, these circumstances represent a material uncertainty as to the Group’s ability to continue as a going concern. This is perfectly clear, and barely needs to be commented on further. Additional finance was needed, but was not yet secured. Without that additional finance, it was unclear if 4D Pharma would be able to continue in its current form. Whenever the words “material uncertainty” and “going concern” are used in the same sentence in a UK company’s annual report, then you know there are balance sheet issues. And unless you are certain that these issues have been or will be resolved, then I think you have to allow for the possibility that the company will be insolvent. Near the start of my investing journey, I suffered a 100% loss from a company which had a balance sheet problem. Most investors have done this at least once in our lives. In investing, as in every other field, the important thing is to learn from the mistake, and not do it again! Expensive Borrowing - the loan which 4D Pharma is currently unable to repay has some interesting detail. Last year, the company turned to a specialist lender to help pay its bills - Oxford Finance LLC. The loan was secured against “substantially all the assets of the Group”, meaning that this lender is at the top of the queue, both against shareholders and against most other creditors, when it comes to getting their money back. Interest was charged at 8.15% plus a spread. In addition, the lender was entitled to a final payment fee of up to 6.5%, and a stream of warrants. Let there be no doubt: this is extraordinarily expensive borrowing for a company to accept. If these were the best terms available, then it’s yet more confirmation of the extremely risky nature of the equity. The loan wasn’t just expensive. It was also restrictive, with a set of covenants affecting 4D Pharma’s future choices. This in particular stands out: The loan includes a restrictive covenant that requires the Group to maintain a cash balance of at least $7.5 million if the Group does not meet the conditions of the equity event. The equity event requires the issue of equity securities and other receipt of income from other partnering transactions, in certain combinations, of at least $45 million before 1 April 2022. If a company is paying an interest rate that’s in or near double digit territory, and with horrible covenants like this, it’s a good sign that the equity is extremely high risk. Once bitten, twice shy Only two weeks ago, 4D Pharma held a pre-AGM Investor Presentation, which you can view on YouTube here. When asked during the Q&A what was the company’s greatest challenge, the CFO spoke loud and clear when he replied “obviously, it’s financing”. He was right - and I expect that many DDDD shareholders will be more sensitive to this aspect of their investments in future. Enjoyed this article? I’d really appreciate if you could please hit the “heart” button. It means a lot to me if you can do this! Thank you. Graham'' |
Posted at 27/6/2022 10:33 by stonerrj Some good logic in your posts above Yas. Quite a few people are saying they didn't go through the detail of the OF deal with a tooth comb - perhaps including yourself back in the day(?), but I think ALL can now see just how bad it was, or at least how bloody risky it was.As you know I have felt very suspicious about the trading patterns and the fall of the share price since around the time that deal was inked. I've asked others on here what they think. Some have said they don't deem it suspicious. But given how explicit 4d's requirement was to raise X amount after inking that loan, obviously the health of the share price would become immediately paramount. It therefore makes me wonder if a hostile force had seen the terms of that deal and recognised with a demolished share price the company would be at a real risk. The company has released good data over the past year - the kind of data that would normally set aim on fire in better times - but at every step we've seen cold water poured onto the share price Many of us have watched the trading here on a daily basis. We see the AT blocks coming in at opportune times, the often small rallies in the morning replaced by AT suppression seen late pm. These had become regular patterns. And of course, lest we forget, we had a named significant shareholder dribbling, what was it, 10% of the issued share capital INTO THE MARKET over many, many months. In my personal opinion, that stank at the time and it still stinks now. I raised my concerns about this very issue repeatedly on this thread and questioned if this selling into the market and the manner in which it was being done, was by design or necessity. I think some of you even emailed the BOD to ask if it wasn't possible for that stock to be sold / transferred off market. I'm not sure if we got any answer as to if any approach had been made to place that stock, sensibly, with a buyer or even if there was any reasonable communication with the seller. All that said, the trend in 4D's sp, closely mirrors the index to be fair and that of its peers, albeit 4D had produced better data than many of them and looked more compelling, clinically. So just what DID 4d have lined up in order to make the 'reasonable expectation' remark in early April (the 1st no less!). The latest RNS states that, in regards to funding, good progress had been made......but ha...who knows what to believe here any more. I rewatched the latest IG Jeremy Naylor interview over weekend and again listened carefully to what was said in that, because interestingly the issue of the OF loan was raised specifically by Naylor. Fundamentally I think sh's need to ask were they kept properly up to date with any significant aspect that would have a material impact on the business......this would include any delays to the clinical pipeline and/or the sourcing of adequate funds sufficient that the terms of our OF loan were met (including the necessity to raise monies and/or to maintain the relevant balance within the coffers). AIMO only. |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
