Mporium Share Discussion Threads

[vuelands] 19/4/2007 21:31

IMHO I think that the AIM market is indicating the usual "sell in may and go away" signals. Interest rates are the real problem, I believe base rates could rise by half a point in May and the market is not ready for such a big rise, nor is the housing market. I could be wrong but it does no harm to waite and see.If I am right GOLD will be the winner,and not much else.DYOR

[leadersoffice] 12/4/2007 18:58

Back to the same old tricks I see. and I thought it was quiet on ere these days!

[spitfire3] 12/4/2007 08:54

really wow you are clever....??????

[harry punter] 12/4/2007 08:52

until we get a news up-date the shares will probably remain static --

[vuelands] 12/4/2007 08:34

These are headed lower could well test 60p,avoid.

[spitfire3] 10/4/2007 15:17

same old harr ramping another dog....how much are you paid per post harry..???

[harry punter] 10/4/2007 15:15

oh dear the more i say to generate a bit of interest the worse it gets for the shares --prehaps i should talk the shares lower -to get a positive move on the shares -- prehaps its best simply to say nothing lol

[harry punter] 10/4/2007 13:38

we should hopefully get a few broker buy notes soon --now the consolidation and funding is complete \o/ --mind you they may hold back until nearer the nasdq floatation and funding --either way --minsters are in great shape \o/

regards harry and the boys in dark glasses

[harry punter] 09/4/2007 16:47

The FDA rules for what can be requested for Fast Track approval process are very clear. Have a look at the FDA site. My guess is that Sharpe was using the phrase in common parlance rather than in terms of the FDA process.

thank you sibb yes you are probably correct --i am as always the optimist but he did also say that these drugs could be on the market within two years -- what has happened -i am not sure -but these betta busters of ours or whatever they are called ---have been also tested with other approved drugs for other ailments and conditions ---that i gather are already on the market--- eli lilley has been mentioned -- whether this opens up the doors for fast tracking -- we really need to ask sharpe --but i am very happy that sharpe is convinced that we will soon gain full regulatory approval for our compounds --and thats good enough for me -- how he does it - i am not too sure --
but if you assume most politicians and government buerocratic agencies people in high places like a bung --especially around election time --i suspect most of the US major pharma and global companies operating in the united states make huge political donations in return for small favours -- bit like over here in our country -money for peerages etc. draw your own conclusions sibb -this company has been created because of an EEC ruling --an idiotic political decision in the first place --

[sipp_2005] 09/4/2007 14:44

Harry.

The FDA rules for what can be requested for Fast Track approval process are very clear. Have a look at the FDA site. My guess is that Sharpe was using the phrase in common parlance rather than in terms of the FDA process.

In plain english, and in general terms, the FDA will support Fast Track when the product being considered is to be used

to treat a life threatening or otherwise terminal condition that has not responded to existing treatments
has a significant benefit over other treatments being used to treat a life threatening or terminal condition
is a reformulation of an existing licensed product. Pharma approvals cover not only the drug but also the manufacturing ingredients, methods, equipment and facilities. The also cover medical appliances.


even tykerb which is the only treatment for some forms of breast cancer will only be licenced for use to treat patients that fall in to the category of having no other hope. Further approvals will be required to widen the set of patients that can be treated. The fast track takes the compounds through a very abbreviated PIII trial, maybe as short as 3 months rather than 3 years.

I really can't see how the MPM compounds fit in to those categories. I am sure they will be able to submit old SK test data but only as support to new testing against approved SPAs

[harry punter] 09/4/2007 13:03

truth is it would be very nice to have an official statement coming from sharpe himself --rather than a coffee house off the record remark-- as i was told a year ago that these compounds can be fast tracked

[sipp_2005] 09/4/2007 12:45

From the MDY thread

sipp_2005 - 9 Apr'07 - 12:43 - 35299 of 35299 edit

The arbiter of what can be fast tracked is the FDA not MPM. As neither of these compounds meet the FDAs criteria for Fast Track I can only assume that sharpe means that he believes MPM can go quicker than they would otherwise.

This is not the MPM thread. Please post there.

[harry punter] 09/4/2007 12:41

MpM compounds have been in GSK development for twelve years and approx £500ml has been spent on R&D to date -- as a result of the Smith Kline/Glaxo merger --various trials were aborted on an EEC directive on competition grounds-- Bio partners (MpM) was formed as a result of the decision taken in brussells

sipp_2005 - 9 Apr'07 - 12:24 - 35297 of 35298


The original trials were for different indications and the compounds are still in Phase IIa. All of my previous comments apply.

These componds were never in GSK development. Work was stopped before GSK was formed. GSK still hold the IPR to these compounds and MPM must make stage payments to GSK whilst development progresses

It is worth noting that the FDA has changed the rules and standards for trials since GSK was formed. Old trial data produced to pre-2005 standards isn't worth a light.

If you have anything else to say, can you do so on the MPM thread

harry punter - 9 Apr'07


thats true but both companies were working on there own compounds prior to the merger--sharpe throughout continued to work on his own projects at smith/klines -- i am led to believe that this combined data from the merged company is still very usefull -- although by FDA rules may require fresh trials --that will need to be conducted -how much of this can be fast tracked i am not too sure -but coming from sharpe himself a lot of this can be fast tracked -- :o))

[sipp_2005] 09/4/2007 12:27

I have copied this across from the MDY thread where Harry Punter is reposting his efforts from this thread. i have posted my comments on his post above. Some may find it useful in understanding the risks involved

Whether MPM is a good investment or not is open to discussion but it is better if we stick to the facts rather than fantasy.


sipp_2005 - 9 Apr'07 - 12:04 - 35295 of 35297 edit

"fda approval is almost a formality imo for our GSK compounds and this will totally transform our company into a major pharma and a global player for the future ---that day is not too far away --"

Rarely have I read such a confused post.

These compounds are in Phase IIa. The US Senate timelines suggest a 12% probability of getting a commercial, approved compound from this stage, a cost of around $600M per compound and a timescale of 8 years Those numbers are about 4 years old.

Phase IIa trials are used to identify adverse effects, there has been no formal tests to prove the efficacy of these compounds or that they have a better profile than other compounds on the market. The best that can be said is that there are "indications" in pre-clinical trials

Why anyone thinks that the FDA approval is "almost a formality" escapes me given that nothing has even been submitted to get the FDA to agree that these compounds aren't completely poisonous to humans !! Furthermore, there are no Special Protocol Agreements in place to agree the end points for the PIIa tests.

FDA Fast Tracking is available to compounds that will either save life or significantly improve the life expectancy/quality of life of terminally ill patients WHEN THERE ARE NO OTHER OPTIONS AVAILABLE. The latest GSK drug to be given fast track status is Tykerb for breast cancer . Fast tracking is not available for compounds to support people who have bad headaches. Fast Track also requires at least some evidence from PIII clinical trials. MPM are probably 3-5 years and $500M away from PIII trials.

IMPO, early stage drug companies are not a place for small retail investors as the risks are too high and continual dilution/additional investment is guaranteed. AZN has lost its two flagship compounds in PIII trials. Novartis has just been forced to withdraw Zelnorm in the US because of "the number of cardiovascular ischemic events in patients taking Zelnorm. These events included heart attack, stroke and unstable angina". (You can still get it in the UK). These are major products with billions of dollars of investment - the risks are high.

The FDA forced Elan to withdraw Tysabri which is the only effective traetment to prevent MS relapses following 2 deaths when Tysabri was prescribed in a combination therapy - it was allowed back to market around 12 months later after additional test evidence was provided and, product labelling was changed

I hold MPM shares but, it is important that these boards maintain some grasp on reality. MPM is very high risk, very high reward - a small holding in a SIPP is fine or maybe a short but a sizeable long position at this stage in the life cycle is simply foolhardy.

[csterling] 06/4/2007 12:50

hp good to see your still here. Been away for a while from advfn, and mpm. every confidence in the future of this company. have you shares in SR Pharma (SPA)? worth a look!

[harry punter] 06/4/2007 07:13

my money is riding minsters to do a joint venture with eli lilley -- and imo this will get us through a nasdaq float probably early next year \o/

regards harry and one of the boys in dark glasses

[harry punter] 05/4/2007 08:32

year end influences of no consequences imo sand --stubbs is a payed director from the old company RII --i doubt if he has a pot to pi$$ in that he can call his own --

[sand dollar] 04/4/2007 10:47

Stubbs sells a shed load, it would be nice if the directors showed a bit more faith in the company, not very good for shareholder confidence is it.

[harry punter] 04/4/2007 07:05

150p will be 3p in the old form ---what a thought

[harry punter] 03/4/2007 10:57

these shares are going to fly -- regulatory approval is a formality imo --

[spitfire3] 02/4/2007 14:21

even leadersoffice has had enough of harry...lol