do you really think the boss would offer higher? perhaps he would and offer a bit higher e.g. 2.40 and with the recent poor experience, most may accept this time rather than being sold down again. psychologicaly, he s already won. just wait for tonight announcement if the boss is still collecting.

not sure, Eddy. I dont think he will make a higher offer within 6 months after the closing date :) at 73.13% and the amount of selling yesterday, he may not need to do anything. The market itself may present the scenario of less than 25% public shareholding within 6 months and the intention not to maintain GenM's listing has been made clear in the offer document too. When the situation of less than 25% public shareholding spread arrives, GenT/GenM is unlikely to submit rectification plan to meet the public shareholding spread.

agreed that we cant rule out the possibility as we do not know the boss's pocket cards, teh. Fainted when you look at the distribution between profits attributable to owners and NCI of GenT and US asset's low ebitda margins despite investing so much money in it. Well, the profits attributable to owners will improve moving forward in tandem with the higher shareholding of GenM. There's GenP, O&G, Power, Lifescience, GenS, GenM and RWLV - one complicated corporate structure with hundreds if not thousands of companies.

extracted some points from the document. (1) While the Board consultants’ independent analysis projects that the facility
will generate substantial, robust annual gaming revenue, their analysis indicates revenue and operating income will be below the Applicant’s projections. The Board emphasizes that its decision to recommend Resorts World for consideration by the
Commission was based upon the rates that the Applicant bid. Any reduction in those rates would be inconsistent with the Board’s reliance upon the application as submitted, and would undermine the Community Advisory Committee process, which included discussion of Resorts World’s projected tax payments. (2) The Board acknowledges Resorts World’s - and the broader Genting Group’s extensive development experience, including three U.S. gaming facilities exceeding $1 billion each and two Asian integrated resorts exceeding $5 billion each. However, the Board notes Genting Group companies’ history of projects delivered late or over budget, often due to scope increases, and its underperformance at some U.S. properties. (3) Resorts World’s application refers to 6,000 slot machines and 780 gaming tables, but its illustration of gaming configurations showed only 4,635 slots and 534 tables. The Board recommends that Resorts World be licensed for that lower number of gaming position levels, to ensure the quality of visitors’ experience. The more aggressive number would make the Queens facility larger than any existing facility in the United States. (4) the Board notes that each Applicant’s proposed development timeline is
ambitious. Resorts World New York City’s projected March 2026 opening may underestimate regulatory and construction complexities, and Bally’s Bronx and Hard Rock Metropolitan Park’s mid-2030 timelines may be optimistic given project scale and
urban constraints. Continued and diligent oversight and coordination will be necessary to ensure timely delivery. (5) As part of the Supplement Return Date Materials, Bally’s Bronx proposed a 30 percent tax on slot machine games and 10 percent on table games and other gaming sources, Hard Rock Metropolitan Park proposed a 25 percent tax on slot machine games and 10
percent on tables and other gaming sources, and Resorts World New York City proposed a 56 percent tax on slot machine games and 30 percent on tables games and other gaming sources. Resorts World New York City indicated in the revised executive summary that accompanied their Supplement Return Date Material that “if other Downstate Licensees open with lower tax rates on slots or tables, RWNYC’s tax rate should also be lowered …” The Board’s recommendation that Resorts World New York City be considered by the N.Y.S. Gaming Commission for a license is based upon the tax rates it bid, not on the lower rates it now would like to apply.

genting can still exit the bid if not granted lower taxes. why compete with others who granted lower taxes? that would be good news to exit since the market isn't supportive of such license looking at the muted share price.

A better question to ask will be where did RWNYC get the guts from to propose such a high tax rates? And, RWNYC should be aware of the on-going push for NYC online gaming too; yet proposing the high tax rates. Even the location board is aware of the underperformance of US assets. I think its purely self inflicted wound unfortunately. As for withdrawing from the bid, I think thats a good idea given the track records of US investments.

at this juncture, most funds/insti that were optimistic about full casino license during the takeover offer period before 1st Dec will probably turn cautious. 31st Dec announcement and the licensing details from nygc will determine whether another round of selling incoming.

Gonna take a while before we hear about hmtm / the alzheimer drugs. The phase 3 clinical trial paper of HMTM has been submitted for publication in a leading medical journal and should be under peer review status currently. Once it passes the peer review stage, it will then be published accordingly in the medical journal. UK MHRA will then make the final decision by then. TauRx has just recently updated the phase 3 clinical trials results back in sep'25 based on the date stamped in the following link. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03446001?tab=results

That's right, Vin. Safe to assume early 2026 for an update to the status. If you can recalled, TauRx mentioned back in Jul'25 that they have responded to UK MHRA and then recently mentioned that UK MHRA has requested additional information. I believed it is related to this. The phase 3 clinical results based on the study details in the link is currently under peer review and I could not find the paper in medical journal. It will only be published once it has been peer reviewed.

true, but its different drug though both are oral meds. primary endpoint failure as there is no statistically significant improvement for glp-1; basically failed hypothesis. hmtm on the other hand has a strong safety profile but encountered glitches during the trials, the wrong placebo aka control group. That's where the sticky part is :) Anyway, the results has been published for peer review.

1/10/2025
TauRx Therapeutics Management Ltd can confirm it has received formal confirmation from the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) that it requires some further information before a final determination on the suitability of hydromethylthionine mesylate (HMTM), as a potential oral treatment for Alzheimer’s disease, can be reached.

TauRx colleagues are in the process of working through the request in order to ensure answers are collated as expediently as is practicable.

The company is committed to working with the MHRA and other organisations as required, and further updates will be provided in due course.



TauRx 确认已收到英国药品和保健品管理局 (MHRA) 的正式通知. 该局表示在确定口服 HMTM 作为阿尔茨海默病治疗方案的适用性前，尚需补充更多信息。

TauRx团队正全力响应该要求，确保尽快完成信息整理工作。

TauRx 承诺将与MHRA及其他相关机构保持密切协作，后续进展将适时公布。