RE:RE:RE:RE:Volume versus increase in share price - "don't like it"floatinketucky wrote: hi bionicjoe. I disagree with you on it all... lol. Without the shelf prospectues they cannot do a pp. That's why they closed the prospectus. Remember back in 2017 you kept saying PP PP PP. and I disagreed then. Still do now and the prospectus is closed to finalize the debate.
Can anyone elese advise on this?
Floatinketucky, the shelf prospectus and the guidelines under which it would operate no longer applies. In it a company has the advantage of conducting a PP or a series of PP's on short notice since the instrument has already been voted in favor of by shareholders. From my experience a regular PP takes over a month to complete from start to finish whereas a shelf prospectus PP can be done with only a few days notice. It stands to reason that if the shelf prospectus is no longer in effect then the company can revert back to the traditional PP. Why the OSC made the announcement on TLT's Sedar listing I can't explain. It came with a reference number but when doing a search on the government site nothing came up for me. You might have to wait until the next MD&A for an explanation.
I don't recall but if I did say a PP was coming I didn't take into account the old cash them or lose them warrants that came due in the spring of 2018 and the small PP that was done later in the year. Enough for everyday expenses but certainly not sufficient to pay for a phase 2 trial and that's what I assume I was getting at IMO, it still is an option for the company if they can't interest a strategic partner to fund the phase 2 trial.