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 0.0% 16.36 0.00 01:00:00
Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology 0.53 -30.35 -22.80 30
Last Trade Time Trade Type Trade Size Trade Price Currency
- O 0 16.36 GBX

4d Pharma (DDDD) Latest News

More 4d Pharma News
4d Pharma Investors    4d Pharma Takeover Rumours

4d Pharma (DDDD) Discussions and Chat

4d Pharma Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
07/7/202212:064D Pharma 2018 - from Ј2 back up to Ј10+29,990
04/7/202208:564D Pharma Research Thread7,704
27/6/202211:534d Pharma600
25/6/202220:21MILLSTONE INVESTOR5
06/2/202206:164D Pharma - Red Hot Buy - The Recovery Thread419

Add a New Thread

4d Pharma (DDDD) Most Recent Trades

No Trades
Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
View all 4d Pharma trades in real-time

4d Pharma (DDDD) Top Chat Posts

DateSubject
07/7/2022
09:20
4d Pharma Daily Update: 4d Pharma Plc is listed in the Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker DDDD. The last closing price for 4d Pharma was 16.36p.
4d Pharma Plc has a 4 week average price of 13.60p and a 12 week average price of 13.60p.
The 1 year high share price is 105p while the 1 year low share price is currently 13.60p.
There are currently 180,337,577 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 0 shares. The market capitalisation of 4d Pharma Plc is £29,503,227.60.
27/6/2022
19:46
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''
27/6/2022
10:33
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.
26/6/2022
17:53
amaretto1: The bones ..... DDDD defaulted on payment to OF M518 Results released ....Caused spike to 77 pence !! Heavily Shorted down, Nasdaq volumes huge ... points to USA based hedge fund .... OF ? .... SO ? Huge Shorting activity to drive share price to a point were raiseing money very difficult .... Are OF and SO in cahoots ... any proof of overlay ?
24/6/2022
17:34
georgethefourth: Besides, how could we get a placing through without first agreeing the increase in share issuance past the current 40% level? The only placing we could do down at these levels wouldn’t be for enough. Unless they keep us suspended past the agm. Soften investors up to the seriousness of it all by doing this, ram the vote through, then dilute 100% and then restore trading. Ma6be they’ve suspended because they know once they actively start talking to instis about a placing, word will get out in the city and the share price would probably get smacked further. At least by suspending, they can discuss terms with a stable price
24/6/2022
13:38
fatgreek: It has buy out written all over it.They car crashed the share price last few months on purpose from stating for no reason they were a going concern then the car crash performance the other day.All to get the share price weighted average down imo
24/6/2022
11:28
l2e: Thanks stonerRj. Appreciate the opinions and advice. I do agree with you in regards to jumping in. I have years of experience and yet still got caught in the headlights, quite silly. My own fault of course.. I know it’s a completely different animal but I see that LAM are also the victim of bridging loans and the need to keep things going. They have recently had a derisory offer and the share price has tanked even lower. This is their statement and what unfortunately can and does happen and what I wanted to avoid. : “The Board is considering the Possible Offer in light of the Group's liquidity position and the Company's funding requirements of $75 million over the next two months. Blofeld's proposal in respect of the Possible Offer is at a very significant discount to the prevailing share price and any acceptable offer would need to include an interim funding solution or bridge financing. “ gla longtermers I believe that you all deserve rewarding for the commitments and support.
23/6/2022
15:20
one_frankel: George, Devon and some of the clearly 'Unlearned' have a read of this albeit slightly biased towards the right!... "Global investors are caught in a perfect storm. The huge slump in the value of equities gets all the headlines and, in fairness, the US stock market is suffering its worst start to any year since the Great Depression with shares on the S&P 500 down 22.3pc on a total returns basis.  But, incredibly, things are even worse in the bond market. Benchmark 10-year US Treasury bonds are on track for their worst first six months of the year since 1788. It's a similar story in most developed markets. That has huge implications because it means investors are left with nowhere to hide. There is also very little precedent to help predict how they might react.  It is extremely rare for the two main asset classes to fall in tandem like this. Since the 1990s, shares and bonds have been “negatively correlated”, which means that when one goes up the other goes down and vice versa. Indeed, there have only been three years in the past century when bonds and equities both lost money.  The vast majority of retail and institutional investors start building their portfolios from the same basic starting point: they invest 60pc of money in shares and 40pc in bonds. Of course, no two portfolios are identical as investors all have different goals, risk appetites and time horizons. However, the 60/40 equity-bond combination has long been viewed as the model template for a well-diversified investment strategy.  Want some capital appreciation? Of course you do, and that comes from investing 60pc of your money in equities. But you could probably do with a little income and some risk mitigation too, right? Well, that’s provided by a 40pc allocation to investment grade fixed income.  The 60/40 portfolio is the Morecambe and Wise of investment strategies, the burger and chips, the Run DMC ft. Aerosmith — a perfect combination of yin and yang that allows the differences of the two sides to accentuate each other's attributes so that the whole is far more than the sum of its parts. Analysts reckon that, all in, about a trillion dollars is invested along these principles. At the moment, almost every single cent of that money is hurting. It isn’t supposed to be this way. In a normal downturn, central banks will cut interest rates in order to try and kickstart the economy. This will result in bond yields falling and bond prices, which move inversely to yields, climbing. A 60/40 portfolio is therefore the financial equivalent of leaving the house with your sunglasses and umbrella — you’re covered whatever the weather. Well, almost any weather. We’re currently in the midst of what may well turn out to be the worst quarter for the 60/40 strategy in decades. Analysts have calculated that a model portfolio will be down about 14pc since the beginning of April. That’s a worse performance than during the financial crisis or at any point during the pandemic, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The rout is so bad that Goldman Sachs Asset Management recently read the last rites for the strategy and declared it dead. The normal rules don’t apply because this isn’t a normal downturn. Interest rates have been close to zero for the best part of 15 years since the financial crisis. Massive amounts of money printing through quantitative easing has pumped up the prices of a whole range of assets. Now, central banks are raising rates in order to try and tame inflation at the same time that the economy is heading towards a possible recession. There have only been three years in the past century when bonds and equities both lost money. The first was in 1931, when a currency crisis resulted in the UK being forced to abandon the gold standard; the second was in 1941, when the US entered the Second World War. Needless to say, these were pretty seismic events. The third time was in 1969. That was when the US Federal Reserve, after letting prices spiral out of control, finally switched into inflation-fighting mode. Interest rates went through the roof. It worked and price rises started to slow but not before the economy had been pushed into a steep recession. The lack of growth combined with sky-high rates resulted in a period of negative returns for both equities and bonds. We appear to be staring down the barrel of something similar. Inflation has become a risk that is too big to hedge. The longer it stays high, the longer bonds and equities remain positively correlated with their prices falling together. This will cause investment models, which had assumed a diversification benefit, to start flashing red. All other things being equal, that will result in investors having to reduce their exposure to both of the main two asset classes, which will, of course, further accentuate the sell-off. On Wednesday, Jay Powell, the chairman of the Fed, warned further surprises on inflation could be in store. Global central banks created an everything bubble; now we’re getting the everything bust and wealth destruction on an epic scale. This all suggests that the standard hedge against a downturn is completely kaput. Investors are desperately searching for new ways to protect themselves. BlackRock, the world’s largest investment firm, has suggested one way would be for investors to allocate more money to strategies that both go long and short equities. Well, up to a point, Lord Copper. What might make sense for individual investors could have profound and unknowable consequences for the market as a whole. There’s nothing inherently wrong with shorting shares and making money if the price falls (regardless of what the governor of the Bank of England has said on the matter in the past). But what will happen if a big chunk of the roughly trillion dollars that is invested in 60/40 strategies starts betting against a broader array of stocks — especially in the midst of a falling market? I guess we may soon find out."
21/6/2022
12:59
wildchild: What an absolute waste of a share this has been. I'm sure there are some big Pharmas who are very pleased with DDDD's ineptitude. They'll probably be able to pick this up for a song in the not too distant future, if they so wish. Wouldn't surprise me at all if hedge funds were shorting this to protect their other clients interests (holdings). I think a lot of people are too naive in the Stockmarket. There are lots of dirty games being played with no comeback. Any company thats loss-making is lined up as a potential short. No short-term path to profitability , and thats another box ticked. High inflation just adds to the misery. In my opinion, yasx and Katsy are right. I think the share price tells it as it is these last couple of years. Without decent cash to run a business, you carry more risk, and in very uncertain times, that risk rises a lot more. I would love to see this company succeed but it doesn't seem like thats going to happen. All in my opinion, of course.
21/6/2022
11:12
concentrate: A couple of questions on this share (perhaps slightly naive) but I've followed it recently out of interest: (1) The fundamental problem is that the company needs to raise money. To any investor, they know that all companies will raise money from institutions at a, say 10%, discount. Therefore the expected future share price is always 10% less than the current share price. This leads to a spiral downwards, because of the clear expectation from PIs that the price will fall (and will therefore be available cheaper when a placing is announced). Therefore, could a rights issue not solve this problem? Issue every shareholder the option to buy one share for 10p (for every share held). Alternatively they can sell the rights to someone else. Therefore there is no dilution as it is also the holders that put forward the capital and not solely the Institutions. At a total guess, the unwanted rights would probably sell for 5p, allowing those with deeper pockets to get a bargain. I'm not sure why this isn't done, so would be interested in any thoughts. (2) Google says c. $40m market cap. so it would seem quite concerning that a big Pharma company does not want to take a punt on this.
09/6/2022
18:58
mark10101: I get that Nigel, but why do you post the same thing multiples times a day? Regular contributors know your stance….. However if you are doing so that new and weak holders checking in here see your doom mongering do you not thinks it could influence the share price negatively? All share prices are is a reflection of sentiment and those who shout loudest are the ones that are heard. If you are a frustrated holder I would suggest, if you don’t have anything nice to say say nothing at all…..
4d Pharma share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
LSE
DDDD
4d Pharma
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20220707 13:48:08