Today’s update introduces new fixes and experience improvements to Forza Motorsport, including tweaks to how Safety Ratings are calculated in Featured Multiplayer, a gloss-matte slider in the Livery Editor, a new Tire Wear scale option for Free Play and Private Multiplayer, and changes to Drivatar AI braking behavior.
Update 8 is headlined by the Track Toys Tour alongside its Spotlight cars – three of which are either new or returning to Motorsport – that you can race in weekly events across Career, Multiplayer and Rivals. We’ve also added Mobil 1 track signage at Maple Valley, placed a barrier along the pit exit at Mid-Ohio Sports Car Course, and reset leaderboards for Le Mans layouts following changes made to the track in the previous update.
In addition, starting with Update 8, players with VIP Membership can look forward to an exclusive 15% discount on a car every week in the Showroom, which will now be available alongside the Spotlight cars and the month-long VIP discount car.
Below is a summary of new content and features, as well as items fixed or improved in Update 8:

Game Content, Features and Events [All Platforms]

Career Events

• Featured Tour: Track Toys Tour (Available from May 15 5pm PT May 16 12am UTC – June 26 5pm PT June 27 12am UTC)
  • Ginetta Juniors (Starts May 15 5pm PT May 16 12am UTC)
  • Weekend Warriors (Starts May 22 5pm PT May 23 12am UTC)
  • Kit Caterhams (Starts May 29 5pm PT May 30 12am UTC)
  • Track Toys (Starts June 5 5pm PT June 6 12am UTC)
• Open Class Tour – 1960s Celebration (Available from May 15 5pm PT May 16 12am UTC – June 12 5pm PT June 13 12am UTC)
  • D Class Series
  • C Class Series
  • B Class Series
  • A Class Series

Reward Cars

• Track Toys Tour: 2019 Porsche #70 Porsche Motorsport 935
• Open Class Tour: 2011 BMW 1 Series M Coupé

Spotlight Cars

• 2019 Ginetta G40 Junior (May 15 5pm PT May 16 12am UTC – May 22 5pm PT May 23 12am UTC)
• 2015 Porsche Cayman GTS (May 22 5pm PT May 23 12am UTC – May 29 5pm PT May 30 12am UTC)
• 2013 Caterham Superlight R500 (May 29 5pm PT May 30 12am UTC – June 5 5pm PT June 12 12am UTC)
• 2019 Elemental RP1 (June 5 5pm PT June 6 12am UTC – June 12 5pm PT June 13 12am UTC)

VIP Discount Cars

• 2014 BAC Mono (May 15 5pm PT May 16 12am UTC – June 12 5pm PT June 13 12am UTC)
• 2016 Lotus 3 Eleven (May 15 5pm PT May 16 12am UTC – May 22 5pm PT May 23 12am UTC)
• 1996 Porsche 996 GT1 (May 22 5pm PT May 23 12am UTC – May 29 5pm PT May 30 12am UTC)
• 1994 Mazda Miata (May 29 5pm PT May 30 12am UTC – June 5 5pm PT June 12 12am UTC)
• 2016 Brabham BT62 (June 5 5pm PT June 6 12am UTC – June 12 5pm PT June 13 12am UTC)

Multiplayer Events

Spec Series

• Lotus 3-Eleven Spec Series (May 15 5pm PT May 16 12am UTC – May 22 5pm PT May 23 12am UTC)
• Early Factory Racecar Series (May 22 5pm PT May 23 12am UTC – May 29 5pm PT May 30 12am UTC)
• Mazda Miata Spec Series (May 29 5pm PT May 30 12am UTC – June 5 5pm PT June 12 12am UTC)
• Modern Factory Racecar Series (June 5 5pm PT June 6 12am UTC – June 12 5pm PT June 13 12am UTC)

Open Series

• R Class Series and P Class Series (May 15 5pm PT May 16 12am UTC – May 22 5pm PT May 23 12am UTC)
• B Class Series and D Class Series (May 22 5pm PT May 23 12am UTC – May 29 5pm PT May 30 12am UTC)
• A Class Series and X Class Series (May 29 5pm PT May 30 12am UTC – June 5 5pm PT June 12 12am UTC)
• S Class Series and C Class Series (June 5 5pm PT June 6 12am UTC – June 12 5pm PT June 13 12am UTC)

Spotlight Series

• 2019 Ginetta G40 Junior (May 15 5pm PT May 16 12am UTC – May 22 5pm PT May 23 12am UTC)
• 2015 Porsche Cayman GTS (May 22 5pm PT May 23 12am UTC – May 29 5pm PT May 30 12am UTC)
• 2013 Caterham Superlight R500 (May 29 5pm PT May 30 12am UTC – June 5 5pm PT June 12 12am UTC)
• 2019 Elemental RP1 (June 5 5pm PT June 6 12am UTC – June 12 5pm PT June 13 12am UTC)

Rivals Events

• Spec Division: Forza Touring Cars – Virginia International Raceway Full Circuit (May 15 5pm PT May 16 12am UTC – June 12 5pm PT June 13 12am UTC)
• VIP: Mono a Mono – 2014 BAC Mono – Yas Marina South Circuit (May 15 5pm PT May 16 12am UTC – June 12 5pm PT June 13 12am UTC)
• Celebrate Senna’s Legacy with McLaren – 2018 McLaren Senna – Silverstone Grand Prix Circuit (May 29 5pm PT May 30 12am UTC – June 26 5pm PT June 27 12am UTC)
• Spotlight – 2019 Ginetta G40 Junior – Brands Hatch Indy Circuit (May 15 5pm PT May 16 12am UTC – May 22 5pm PT May 23 12am UTC)
• Spotlight – 2015 Porsche Cayman GTS – Mugello Club Circuit (May 22 5pm PT May 23 12am UTC – May 29 5pm PT May 30 12am UTC)
• Spotlight – 2013 Caterham Superlight R500 – Grand Oak Club Circuit (May 29 5pm PT May 30 12am UTC – June 5 5pm PT June 12 12am UTC)
• Spotlight – 2019 Elemental RP1 – Lime Rock Full Circuit (June 5 5pm PT June 6 12am UTC – June 12 5pm PT June 13 12am UTC)

Bug Fixes and Improvements

Stability [All Platforms]

• Fixed a game crash caused by quickly and repeatedly changing the number of Drivatar AI opponents in Free Play event setup. [1717959]
• Fixed an issue that occurred when exiting out of pre-race in Free Play quickly after switching cars or modifying the event setup would cause a soft lock in the loading screen. [1732080]
• Fixed a stability issue when the player would exit to Event Menu while on track in during a Test Drive. [1751335]
• Fixed an issue in which disconnecting and reconnecting a controller would prevent the player from progressing to the game menu. [1734977]

PC

• Improvements have been made to video memory usage on PC.
• Addressed an issue where the screen would flash white when players entered the My Cars menu. [1749202]
• Fixed an issue on Steam where you would repeatedly be shown the Self-Improvement achievement, even when you haven't unlocked it. [1738129]
• Fixed an issue on Steam where the Safety Star and Safety Superstar achievements would accumulate incorrect progress after a multiplayer race. [1738130]
• Fixed an issue where the player could not exit out of Career when hovering over event posters and pressing the right mouse button. [1717135]
• Fixed an issue where Exit Event messages could not be closed out using a Cancel Button (B Button/ESC Key/Right Mouse Click). [1717315]
• Selecting replays using the mouse no longer requires a double click. [1580893]
• We’ve made changes to how PC graphics settings are applied to ensure you are only prompted to restart the game when it is necessary. [1568770]
• Fixed an issue where the player is prompted to restart the game when only the ‘Show Framerate’ toggle has been modified. [1755225]
• Fixed a PC-specific issue where the game would crash when disconnecting a wheel and reconnecting with a controller in Featured Multiplayer. [1728706]

Gameplay [All Platforms]

• Introduced a Tire Wear Scale option to Free Play and Private Multiplayer, allowing adjustments to the rate at which tires are worn. 1x is the default value. At 2x, tire wear will occur twice as fast. Values range from .5x to 10x. This setting is found in the Event Setup Rules tab and in the Fuel & Tire menu when on track.
• Migrated the Open Class Tour in Career from the Builders Cup tab to the Featured tab. The Open Class Tour will be found in the Featured tab going forward.
• Fixed an issue where lap times faster than 18 seconds on Eaglerock Oval in Rivals X Class Time Attack leaderboards were not being posted.
• Fixed the achievement “Leisure Cruise” so that it now correctly unlocks when the specified criteria to complete a single lap at Circuit de Spa-Francorchamps during sunset has been met. [1681510]
• Adjusted the rolling start in the Builders Cup Power Tour: Iconic Muscle event so that cars no longer collide before the 3-2-1. [1717346]
• Fixed an issue where players not using steering assists were given control of their car at the wrong time when exiting the pit. [1717893]
• Fixed a bug in Private Multiplayer lobbies where player cars would appear on the track instead of in the pits when the host changes the selected track and while one or more players are in the Post Race screen. [1729190]
• Fixed an issue in Private Multiplayer where timed races didn’t mark laps as dirty when driving off track. [1757780]
• In Featured Multiplayer, Telemetry now states the correct number of Qualifying Laps before Featured Race. [1733624]
• Fixed an issue where every Featured Multiplayer post-race transition would only ever show Laguna Seca art as the next track. Now, the player will see the correct track loading screens when continuing from one completed Featured Multiplayer race to the next event. [1653249]
• Fixed an issue where the "Not Connected" UI popup would repeatedly show during sign-in even after a connection was regained. [1746586]
• Fixed an issue in the Settings menu where resetting all options to default values did not apply to Audio Performance. [1731587]

Multiplayer – Matchmaking and Events [All Platforms]

• We’ve updated Safety Ratings in Featured Multiplayer by increasing the number of previous races the Safety Rating uses to determine your rating from 10 to 20, and by making on-track collisions more impactful to Safety Rating. Changes will take effect after your first race in Update 8.
• In addition, we’ve improved the matchmaking algorithm to search for a narrower range of Safety Ratings compared to your own. For example, players with an 'S' Safety Rating should no longer be matched with players who have 'E' and 'D' Safety Ratings. Groups will be connected to matches based on the player with the lowest Safety Rating.
• We’ve updated Featured Multiplayer events to use consistent weather conditions and avoid unpredictable weather transitions mid-race. [1750733]
• Removed the 2020 KTM X-Bow GT2 and the 2020 Lamborghini Essenza SCV12 from the Forza GT Series and added them to the Modern Factory Racecar Series in Featured Multiplayer. [1753741]
• Added the 2019 Porsche #70 Porsche Motorsport 935 to the Forza GT Series in Featured Multiplayer.
  • Developer’s Note: We’re currently working on recategorizing Forza GT racecars into separate spec divisions and expect to push these changes into the game this summer.
• Corrected an issue where the 1969 Lola #6 Sunoco T70 MkIIIB was eligible for the Vintage Le Mans Prototypes Series rather than the Prototype Group Racing Series. [1731588]

Car Balancing [All Platforms]

• The following cars have been rebalanced in Featured Multiplayer Spec Series:

Featured Multiplayer Spec SeriesCar NameChange Summary Forza GT Series2019 Ginetta G55 GT4Engine torque: +25% Car Mass: +13.4% Front Downforce: -45% Rear Downforce: -45% Early Factory Racecar Series1997 McLaren F1 GTIncreased Power 10% Early Factory Racecar Series1997 Porsche 911 GT1 StrassenversionIncreased Power 13% Lowered weight/ballast 3% Early Factory Racecar Series1989 Ferrari F40 CompetizioneIncreased power 10% Weight decreased 2%

Drivatar AI [All Platforms]

• Reduced unnecessary braking scenarios for Drivatar AI opponents. Examples of this include braking while attempting to pass, two cars wide in corners, at the apex of corners, and on straights.

Tracks [All Platforms]

• Increased the track material luminance to be more physically correct, improving the overall contrast and color saturation of the track. This affects newly released tracks as well as future track updates.
• Maple Valley has been refreshed with “Mobil 1 Presents Maple Valley” race day branding, which includes new track signage featuring Mobil 1.
• Fixed multiple pop-in zones across the entire Maple Valley track.
• Fixed multiple pop-in zones across the entire Mid-Ohio track.
• Fixed numerous areas across Mid-Ohio where textures were displayed at low resolution or stretched.
• Placed a barrier along the pit exit at Mid-Ohio Sports Car Course. To accommodate this change, leaderboards for this track have been reset.
• Fixed a couple zones at Brands Hatch that were missing or displaying broken skids.
• We’ve reset leaderboards for Le Mans track layouts following the changes made to this track in Update 7.

Cars [All Platforms]

• 2016 Ford Shelby GT350R: Fixed an issue where suspension couldn’t be tuned without the Drift Suspension upgrade. [1648500]
• 2013 McLaren P1: Fixed an issue where the aero wing wasn’t displaying its deployment animation when accelerating after braking for a turn. [1592856]
• 1992 Volkswagen Golf Gti 16v Mk2: Fixed an issue where the Analog speedometer did not match the telemetry. [1652263]
• Fixed an issue on select cars where the fog lights or reflectors would instead act as brake lights. This fix applies to the 1998 Toyota Supra RZ, 2003 Ford Focus RS and 1997 McLaren F1 GT. [1730279] [1731165]

Livery Editor [All Platforms]

• Introduced a Vinyl Material tool to the Livery Editor which can be used to uniformly adjust all vinyl materials on a car from matte (non-reflective) to glossy (reflective). This includes a reset option to revert all vinyls to match car paint glossiness. Imported designs from Forza Horizon 5 using its similar feature will automatically inherit these values.
• When removing a livery from a vehicle, the color will now be reset to the default manufacturer color instead of the color when the player purchases it. [1731939]
• Adjusted the arrangement of hint buttons in Livery Editor at the bottom of the screen. [1741965]
• Fixed an issue in the Livery Editor where the save popup would not be shown when exiting after flipping a decal or creating a mask from a layer. [1739245]
• The 'Find Designs' menu is now accessible for rental cars when players try to open it from 'Design & Paint Menu' and 'Livery Mode Select' scenes. [1643182]
• Fixed an issue where the game was creating empty base model liveries. Forza base liveries will no longer be created and stored unless it's the current livery in use. [1551365]
• Added iconography to layers in the Livery Editor. The player can now see icons to indicate if it's a mask layer or a locked layer. [1370431]
• The background values (position, scale, color, etc.) will not change when the player is navigating through the lighting options panel. [1734187]
• Fixed issues when flipping the rotation of vinyls in the Livery Editor. [1728080]
• Fixed an issue to prevent zooming of camera if the mouse is over Livery Color Selector in all color modes (Normal, Manufacturer, Special) for consistency. [1721951]
• Addressed an issue where player brake calipers were displaying the wrong color instead of the expected special colors. [1712512]
• Fixed an issue in the Design & Paint menu where non-block color vinyl shapes ignored mask effects. [1630741]

Accessibility [All Platforms]

• Screen Narrator now properly narrates the “Place in Car Bay” scene. [1738094]
• Screen Narrator will now read associated credit bonuses as part of the option value names on Free Play Advanced options which affect credits earned during the event. This change also fixes the display of the bonus percentages for all players. [1721875]
• Fixed intermittent failures of Screen Narrator to read the tab names in the Builders Cup Series Selection scene. [1721928]
• Screen Narrator now fully supports the “Series Standings” leaderboard scene accessed from the Builders Cup Event Setup scene. [1721944], [1657223]
• Screen Narrator now correctly reads the Driving Assists modal popup for new players during the initial races of Career mode. [1738064]
• Screen Narrator will now always correctly read the Data Out IP Address and Port settings in the Gameplay & HUD settings menu. [1667393]
• Fixed an issue with Screen Narrator reading DLC pack descriptions twice in Purchase Options menu. [1746587]
• Added descriptive text for the SoundCloud Driver Suit. [1708217]
• The Tune Setups menu is now fully narrated. [1709554]

Localization [All Platforms]

• Fixed an issue where several words were not translated when using [sv-SE] (Swedish-Sweden) language. [1589182]
• Fixed an issue causing hint button text to exceed the text boundaries in several languages. [1711597]
• Fixed a typo in Screen Narrator voiceovers in [pt-BR] (Portuguese-Brazil) when viewing car info panels. [1712323]
• Fixed an issue that caused text to overlap in the Fuel & Tire setup screen when text size is set to largest, and the language is set to [fi-FI] (Finnish-Finland). [1749301]
• Fixed an issue where the word “Pause” is not translated in [ja-JP] (Japanese-Japan). [1749465]
• Fixed an issue where the word “Hardcore” is not translated in several languages. [1749471]
• Fixed an incorrect character in [zh-TW] (Taiwanese Mandarin-Taiwan) that caused Fuel & Tire menu categories to be mistranslated. [1749479]

i have this PID control that i wanna use to stabilize a drone, idc about flight right now, i just want it to spin the motors at 50% speed and then add the PID output to the base speed "

#include  #include  #include  #include  Adafruit_MPU6050 mpu; ArduPID controlRoll; ArduPID controlPitch; double rollSP = 0; double pitchSP = 0; double rollInput; double pitchInput; double rollOutput; double pitchOutput; // Initially set low PID values for smoother control double rollP = 0.1; double pitchP = 0.1; double rollI = 0.0; double pitchI = 0.0; double rollD = 0.1; double pitchD = 0.1; const int esc1Pin = 17; const int esc2Pin = 5; const int esc3Pin = 18; const int esc4Pin = 19; int valanMax = 950; int valanMin = 450; void setup(void) { Serial.begin(115200); while (!Serial) { delay(10); // Wait for serial monitor to open } // Attempt communication with MPU6050 if (!mpu.begin()) { Serial.println("Failed to find MPU6050 chip"); while (1) { delay(10); } } // Initial motor spin at slightly above minimum (adjust if needed) analogWrite(esc1Pin, valanMin + 10); analogWrite(esc2Pin, valanMax - (valanMin + 10)); analogWrite(esc3Pin, valanMin + 10); analogWrite(esc4Pin, valanMax - (valanMin + 10)); mpu.setAccelerometerRange(MPU6050_RANGE_16_G); mpu.setGyroRange(MPU6050_RANGE_250_DEG); mpu.setFilterBandwidth(MPU6050_BAND_21_HZ); Serial.println(""); delay(100); pinMode(esc1Pin, OUTPUT); pinMode(esc2Pin, OUTPUT); pinMode(esc3Pin, OUTPUT); pinMode(esc4Pin, OUTPUT); controlRoll.begin(&rollInput,&rollOutput,&rollSP,rollP,rollI,rollD); controlPitch.begin(&pitchInput,&pitchOutput,&pitchSP,pitchP,pitchI,pitchD); } void loop() { // Base speed for 50% throttle with slight adjustment (optional) const double baseSpeed = valanMin + (valanMax - valanMin) * 0.5 + 10; // Read sensor data sensors_event_t a, g, temp; mpu.getEvent(&a, &g, &temp); // Calculate roll and pitch angles from accelerometer data int gradosRoll = atan2(a.acceleration.y, a.acceleration.z) * RAD_TO_DEG; int gradosPitch = atan2(-a.acceleration.x, a.acceleration.z) * RAD_TO_DEG; // Optional gyro drift compensation (adjust values as needed) g.gyro.x = g.gyro.x + 0.01; g.gyro.y = g.gyro.y + 0.085; // Set roll and pitch inputs for PID controller rollInput = gradosRoll; pitchInput = gradosPitch; // Perform PID calculations to determine motor adjustments controlRoll.compute(); controlPitch.compute(); // Calculate motor signal with base speed (adjusted for deadzone) int motorSignal = map(rollOutput + pitchOutput + baseSpeed, -valanMax, valanMax, valanMin + 10, valanMax); // Constrain motor signal within valid ESC range motorSignal = constrain(motorSignal, valanMin + 10, valanMax); // Set motor signals for each ESC with direction control analogWrite(esc1Pin, motorSignal); analogWrite(esc2Pin, valanMax - motorSignal); analogWrite(esc3Pin, motorSignal); analogWrite(esc4Pin, valanMax - motorSignal); // Uncomment for debugging (optional) Serial.print("Grados Roll:"); Serial.print(gradosRoll); Serial.print(" Grados Pitch:"); Serial.print(gradosPitch); Serial.print(" senal motor:"); Serial.println(motorSignal); delay(100); } " 

im using a MPU6050 to stabilize a drone, idc the fight, i just want it to not move on roll and pitch this is the code and ill apreciate any help "

#include  #include  #include  #include  Adafruit_MPU6050 mpu; ArduPID controlRoll; ArduPID controlPitch; double rollSP = 0; double pitchSP = 0; double rollInput; double pitchInput; double rollOutput; double pitchOutput; // Initially set low PID values for smoother control double rollP = 0.1; double pitchP = 0.1; double rollI = 0.0; double pitchI = 0.0; double rollD = 0.1; double pitchD = 0.1; const int esc1Pin = 17; const int esc2Pin = 5; const int esc3Pin = 18; const int esc4Pin = 19; int valanMax = 950; int valanMin = 450; void setup(void) { Serial.begin(115200); while (!Serial) { delay(10); // Wait for serial monitor to open } // Attempt communication with MPU6050 if (!mpu.begin()) { Serial.println("Failed to find MPU6050 chip"); while (1) { delay(10); } } // Initial motor spin at slightly above minimum (adjust if needed) analogWrite(esc1Pin, valanMin + 10); analogWrite(esc2Pin, valanMax - (valanMin + 10)); analogWrite(esc3Pin, valanMin + 10); analogWrite(esc4Pin, valanMax - (valanMin + 10)); mpu.setAccelerometerRange(MPU6050_RANGE_16_G); mpu.setGyroRange(MPU6050_RANGE_250_DEG); mpu.setFilterBandwidth(MPU6050_BAND_21_HZ); Serial.println(""); delay(100); pinMode(esc1Pin, OUTPUT); pinMode(esc2Pin, OUTPUT); pinMode(esc3Pin, OUTPUT); pinMode(esc4Pin, OUTPUT); controlRoll.begin(&rollInput,&rollOutput,&rollSP,rollP,rollI,rollD); controlPitch.begin(&pitchInput,&pitchOutput,&pitchSP,pitchP,pitchI,pitchD); } void loop() { // Base speed for 50% throttle with slight adjustment (optional) const double baseSpeed = valanMin + (valanMax - valanMin) * 0.5 + 10; // Read sensor data sensors_event_t a, g, temp; mpu.getEvent(&a, &g, &temp); // Calculate roll and pitch angles from accelerometer data int gradosRoll = atan2(a.acceleration.y, a.acceleration.z) * RAD_TO_DEG; int gradosPitch = atan2(-a.acceleration.x, a.acceleration.z) * RAD_TO_DEG; // Optional gyro drift compensation (adjust values as needed) g.gyro.x = g.gyro.x + 0.01; g.gyro.y = g.gyro.y + 0.085; // Set roll and pitch inputs for PID controller rollInput = gradosRoll; pitchInput = gradosPitch; // Perform PID calculations to determine motor adjustments controlRoll.compute(); controlPitch.compute(); // Calculate motor signal with base speed (adjusted for deadzone) int motorSignal = map(rollOutput + pitchOutput + baseSpeed, -valanMax, valanMax, valanMin + 10, valanMax); // Constrain motor signal within valid ESC range motorSignal = constrain(motorSignal, valanMin + 10, valanMax); // Set motor signals for each ESC with direction control analogWrite(esc1Pin, motorSignal); analogWrite(esc2Pin, valanMax - motorSignal); analogWrite(esc3Pin, motorSignal); analogWrite(esc4Pin, valanMax - motorSignal); // Uncomment for debugging (optional) Serial.print("Grados Roll:"); Serial.print(gradosRoll); Serial.print(" Grados Pitch:"); Serial.print(gradosPitch); Serial.print(" senal motor:"); Serial.println(motorSignal); delay(100); } " 

TL;DR
• EBU provides hosting country with a base amount of around 6.2 million euros
• The 6.2 euros are financed proportionally by the participating countries (participation fee)
• The broadcaster of the host country has to pay additional 10-20 millions from its own pocket (made possible through sponsorship)
Longer Version translated by AI
(…) But is participating in the ESC really that expensive?
A significant part of the total costs for participating countries is the fee they must pay to the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) to participate in the competition at all. Compared to other TV broadcasts, this fee is relatively low, but it has steadily increased in recent years (…)
Shortly before that, Swedish television SVT announced that the participation fee would increase, without providing precise information on the future amount. This is said to be due, among other things, to Russia's non-participation, but its cause is probably primarily due to generally increased production costs.
ESC fees for individual participating countries:
Although sums for some countries can be found in the media, many broadcasters refrain from publishing them.
Country + Fees to the EBU / partially rounded
Germany (2015) 363,500 euros
Germany (2017) 380,000 euros
Germany (2018) 400,800 euros
Germany (2019) 405,100 euros
Germany (2021) 396,452 euros
Germany (2022) 407,000 euros
Germany (2023) 473,000 euros
Greece (2012) 120,000 euros
Greece (2023) 150,000 euros
Ireland (2013) 70,000 euros
Malta (2010) 80,000 euros
Montenegro (2012) 23,000 euros
Netherlands (2016) 250,000 euros
North Macedonia (2022) 39,143 euros
Romania (2014) 130,000 euros
Switzerland (2016) 63,500 euros
Spain (2015) 356,000 euros
Spain (2022) 640,000 euros
Spain (2023) 347,700 euros
The fact that the participation fees vary so widely has something to do with the EBU's redistribution system: Each full member of the broadcasting union is assigned a point value based on its reach and the usage of Eurovision offerings (including news footage and sports broadcasts). Based on these point values, the total costs for joint productions are distributed among the individual participating states. In financing the ESC, the EBU provides the hosting country with a base amount of around 6.2 million euros, as reported by the newspaper "Daily Star." These funds are then financed by the countries broadcasting the ESC as a participation fee proportionally through redistribution. The hosting broadcasting organization must then contribute between 10 and 20 million euros from its own pocket, which is also made possible through sponsorship.
(…)
Are the Big Five really the paymasters of the ESC?
Despite claims that the Big Five countries (Germany, UK, Spain, Italy, and France) finance the lion's share of the ESC production costs, the actual numbers suggest otherwise. While they contribute the highest participation fees, they're not necessarily the main financiers of the competition. For instance, Germany's contribution to the total cost of around 11 million euros for the ESC in Turin was only 3.7 percent, as countries contribute only through their fee redistribution. Similarly, Spain's share of the total costs of around 15 million euros for the ESC in Vienna was just 2.4 percent. Being the paymaster seems somewhat different. The overall balance is similar for the other Big Five countries, but the complaints about fee waste are louder in countries with lackluster performance.
Total costs versus benefits
In fact, the Eurovision Song Contest is a comparatively inexpensive TV format for the hosting broadcasters. British economist Stephen Boyle calculated in 2016 that the 14.3 million euros (note: not officially confirmed by SVT) estimated by Swedish TV as the pure production costs for all three shows in Stockholm, for example, correspond to the costs of broadcasting rights for a Premier League football match. In return for the ESC, broadcasters get TV entertainment that they could hardly produce at this level themselves.
A similar calculation was made in 2015 on eurovision-spain.com regarding the costs of the Spanish broadcaster TVE: According to this, the price for one minute of ESC broadcast was 791 euros, while one minute of a 2016 UEFA European Championship football match (with a similar expected viewership) cost 21,600 euros. It begs the question: If it didn't pay off, wouldn't they have stopped it long ago?
ESC pays off for ARD - and the hosts
The ESC entry fees for Germany in 2023 are significantly below the average production costs of prime-time entertainment shows. The value in return is high, consisting of broadcasting the ESC final and the two semi-finals - a total of around eight hours of television.
Host cities like Turin or this year's Liverpool emphasize the importance of the Eurovision Song Contest for the local economy and society. The EBU itself has produced a report on the sustainable impact of the competition in 2022, which might be worth reading before calling for the next withdrawal from the contest.
source - in German

I have tried various charging bricks and it always stays at „critical battery“ work any help??

I am doing my #2 build and calculating everything through eCalc multicopter, first build is ~300g take off 4" LR with 1404 3000kv, 3s or 4s, flies slow but decent. I don't have much experience, but in terms of max speed and flight time the calculations are pretty accurate.
Second build is 3" with 140mm wheelbase at 45g, 35A esc ~10g, planning 4s LiPos at around 850mAh and props 3" at 1.5" pitch with 3 blades.
With these values I get best results with Diatone Mamba Toka 1404 4000Kv, largest mixed flight time and hover time. Thrust-Weight and Specific thrust is at nice numbers.
There is also Toka 1404 5000kv and the difference between 4000kv is mainly in higher payload, higher weight to ratio and higher power used.
The part that gets me is the RPM Maximum for motor vs Optimum Efficiency stats.
For 4000kv it's 47156rpm maximum at 82% efficiency and 47455rpm optimum at 81.9% efficiency, so just 299rpm off, at full throttle.
For 5000kv it's 51904 maximum at 80.1% efficiency and 59308 optimum at 81.9% efficiency, so 7404rpm off to optimum.
At 51904 rpm the 3" prop tip would spin at crazy 463mph anyway according to WarpDriveProps calc, so 4000kv and staying around 40000rpm makes more sense.
The hover speed is 22045 rpm for both motors, but efficiency is 72.4% for 4000kv and 66.4% for 5000kv and based on the graph the efficiency is nice on most throttle levels.
I have tried calculating with number of motors (ideally those that are in stock and in eCalc db) and 1204 4000+kv motors or 1604 3xxxkv or 1804 and the specs weren't looking better.
With smaller motors its often at the limit of the 4s and risk of overheating/burning.
With bigger motors it's lower Thrust-Weight ratio, perhaps less power used in bigger motors, but the the maximum rpm speed is almost always few k rpm higher than optimum, 38k rpm at max compared to 30k optimum for example. In that case it would be pointless to do more than e.g 75% throttle.
As I am seeing lots of 3" build with 1604 or 1804 and seeing these calculations I am confused about what would be the performance/flyability of different setups.
I am not sure what features I am looking for, it shouldn't be a racer nor camera lifter nor freestyler ready to get banged up.
I guess long range would be closest since I would like to have nice efficiency at 30-40% throttle just bit about hover, but of course with 850mah it would be 5 minutes flight max anyway, some very big LiPos or LiIions.
All in all I just enjoy doing the numbers and calculate everything possible and then making it a reality and see what was off.

Right now i'm using https://rcplanes.online/calc_thrust.htm to calculate the thrust my motors will output [testing different motoprop combinations for new build]. I need to use the the supply voltage and current features, but I'm not exactly sure how to use it. I'm using a 4in1 Esc rated for 50a, so i believe, for one motor, it would supply 12.5 amps. I'm running 4-cell voltage so I just plugged in 14.8 volts. Does this calculator assume this is the input voltage and current to the motor or the ESC inputs? If it's the motor, than is the motor input voltage the same as the esc input voltage? [Yes, i know the RPM is stupidly high. I know it's not realistic. All i need to know is the voltage and amps to make sure i get motor output power right.]

Learned something yesterday, don't use a 1/8th motor with a 1/10th ESC. I paired a Hobbywing QuicRun 4268 2600kv to my VXL-3S with a 3S 150C battery because I wanted more torque. It crawled around just fine, but as soon as I pulled the trigger, it went up in flames. I'm guessing the motor and battery drew way more amps than the ESC could handle. I thought I'd be fine since I was only running on 3S and both the motor and ESC were using 6.5mm bullet connectors, but the ESC is not smart enough to govern how many amps it can take. The VXL-3S can take 320 peak amps, amps = watt/volts, I wish manufacturers printed out how many watts their motors make so we could calculate the amps draw.

Hello, I would like to see if someone has looked for the solution or if I really have to buy a new keyboard. It turns out that when I was playing, my keyboard started writing the W with the 8 type like this (w8) and also the (a5) for the letter A. In addition to that, the Windows key literally opens the calculator and does not open the Windows window, it is quite annoying when trying to exit the screen, I had seen that pressing Fn+Esc then F1, F3, F5 returned the keyboard to factory settings but this is only a temporary solution, just like when you are in the Google search engine, when you press W, paste one of the searches as it is, if someone can help me I would be grateful

I'm going to post a lot of critique here so let me start by saying I enjoyed the game a lot, in fact I didn't play video games for a long time due to depression and being able to sunk in 30 hours in just a few days was definietly suprising to me. Generally I would say the game released too soon for early access, and is a bit pricey compared to other titles when it comes to content but I hope with extra funds slavic magic will be able to assemble bigger team and overhauls the game a little to make this project truly special, I would gladly pay for this game again if that happens.
Hopefully Greg sees this and considers some points for future roadmap :)
And here comes the long list of my wishes, bugs, praise, thoughts etc in no particular order. I'll edit the list once something new comes to my mind:

• really don't like how with each new region you start from the beginning and have to research everything again. I would make research global but keep region specialization (just add something like a production throughput bonus, or unlock higher levels building only in that region). Incentivise players instead of punishing them for expansion. Add the possibility of just sending resources from one to another (with a cart for bigger quantities) or the possibility of buying from the region using regional wealth
• not a fan of how trading isn't scaling with your town and at some point your wares are just worthless, it can suddenly tank your whole playthrough if you don't notice it early enough and rely on trading for food. Supply and demand mechanic is a good direction, just please keep it less punishing, (until it's developed properly at least)
• need trading caravans for later stages when you move bigger quantities or more resources at the same time, currently, there is huge traffic of traders coming in and out of town, looks kind of silly.
• Also would like to have some rough estimations of how much stuff I can move/do at what time. I often can't judge how long some things will take so I end up waiting for one thing while the rest is already done. Or you go for plate armor only to learn that it takes forever to make so you would end up with more money selling trees in a region that is literally mostly forest.
• full window menus (like in retinue equipment) can't be closed with ESC, i constantly switch to the main menu by mistake
• no batch recruiting and equipping for retinue and even worse, buttons change position when you change something slowing you down
• music is awesome, but more please. after 30 hours it's getting repetetive
• voices at the markets are a bit too loud even after adjusting, and are very repetitive for me
• general lack of tooltips and explanations of how mechanics work was a bit daunting, some things straight up didn't make sense at first. I would for example struggle with food, so I had to make 5 more fully staffed trading posts, and then finally I started making more than I needed. The game isn't telling you where is the bottleneck, figuring out things yourself is fun but the line leading to frustration is quite thin here. Another example I didn't know if I needed to assign someone to a granary, storehouse, or hitching post and what would they even do since villagers seem to do things on their own
• economy balance is broken ofc, fields don't produce a lot I ended up importing grains and producing food myself most of the time
• speaking of fields we need a better way of managing multiple fields, It took me an embarrassingly long time to figure out what crop to assign each year so I have always a steady supply. I would like one table with all fields, or even better just mark every year I want at least 2 of those crops and 2 of those, and the game does the assigning for you.
• sheep on fields are bugged, they stay on the field when the crop rotates (i think it happens sometimes when you have more than 1 field with sheep on it)
• seasonal work and reassigning workers based on the season (bc you are always short of workers) is micromanagement hell imo. I would like to assign seasonal workers to multiple places in a separate menu so gatherers (or hunters when they wait for animals to respawn and others) could for example thresh grain during winter. I always forged to unassign people from the corpse pit as well
• need more upgrade levels for building so we don't end up with 6 of the same production building in close proximity and so building match houses later on
• additional skins for the building would be very welcome
• especially with mod support (!) (would add some myself ;))
• since the game is historically accurate everything looks similar from above, but need some overlays with things like production, what is what, what goes where, and how much. It takes me too long to find the correct production building
• game is not aiming for rigidity in production where you can calculate everything and end up with everything synchronized perfectly I get it and I like it but I need some indication if everything is at least going smoothly or if there is some bottleneck
• add an option for NPCs to work only as much as is needed (historically people don't work if they don't need to right?) since I don't need to have few thousand of some resource anyway (can't just sell it since low demand, can't just send it to another region etc) In return people could, for example, do some hobbies that produce general knick knacks that increase region wealth, be lazy but with increased approval, help around where needed (for example with moving goods that are left in rain), bury dead (why burying pit even has so many slots btw)
• the collision between NPCs in larger town is getting quite bad (option for the double road would be welcome too), the militia is stumbling into each other instead of running
• NPC's leading ox's often get stopped for no reason, had one invisible horse as well
• roads should create new nodes when connected to each other so when you delete a road you don't end up deleting like 2 kilometers of it
• making curved roads is funky, and should be reworked
• road upgrade options
• love the organic way your city develops (not a fan of tetris like systems, (looking at you anno)) but for the love of god, snapping is terrible. Need more spline points when making new plots + a possibility to move those points after planning the whole plot + disable snap to roads. Build, add/reduce divisions are too close resulting in misclicks
• need planning mode when no resources are available + option on what to do with those buildings after resources become available
• no option to cancel upgrades when misclicked
• militia has equipment based on house lvl, not a fan, what's the point of making every armor in the game if half of my army is wearing rags. I would prefer to be able to buy armoweapons from local artisans for a discount and store it in a manor warehouse and the militia would pick it up from there so everyone could be equipped well if the region is wealthy instead of basing on personal wealth (or be able to choose between those 2 options)
• archers don't seem to have a lot of utility currently
• was afraid my economy would crash after half of my militia died but actually nothing happened which was a bit underwhelming
• would be nice if heavier armored people would get hurt instead of just getting killed and would have to be treated afterwards with herbs
• would be nice to have some logistics when fighting, so preparing supplies for each day of marching for example it having a big impact on the actual fight result, troops have supplies for 10 days and if after that time they don't resuply at the village or supply cart they start to get sick, die from hunger etc. Some sort of war economy would be fun to manage i think. Some additional opportunities for cutting off enemy supply (like ambushing their wagon in the forest) would be a great way of adding a way to defend against a more numerous enemy
• mercenaries have too big an impact on current battles imo, ai just buys all of them leaving you with no means to defend if you don't have good militia, I would balance it so if we can have 6 military units then we could recruit no more than 2 mercenary units for now
• missing warning if the bulding has no workers (often end up forgetting that what I placed was already built 10 minutes ago) but would also like to be able to turn of the warning to be able to just chill and enjoy the game without being bombarded
• markets range/supply is broken as we all know but additionally, I'm not a fan of every family making their own stall so we end up with 15 stalls having two eggs to sell, just takes people away from them actually doing stuff. I would prefer to only have granary/storage workers being able to set up a stall, have dedicated merchants at the market, or at least ability to stop the family from having their own stalls
• would like a dedicated building for things like chicken or goat farms, or at least be able to make the extension bigger so it produces more eggs/hides per plot but workers could be no longer available for general work
• not saying anything about parts that are mostly early wip, like diplomacy, manor, and so on but again, this thing should be more developed for early access release imo
• of course would love to see more resources to manage in general, more animals, production chains, bigger wagons for moving resources at some point, and festivals (apart from just being a nice addition they could be a good way of converting personal wealth to regional and vice versa
• autosave message is too distracting, just keep it smaller to the side. It is also messing with menus and the camera if you had something open during autosave (can close the menu, move your camera etc) Less noticeable autosaves would be welcome too since i prefer to keep saving often during early access.
• no crashes in my 30-hour playthrough, nice job for such early access
• lod's range on ultra setting is too low, mostly for foliage but some buildings have pop in as well
• forester has a very small working range, kind of useless. In some places you can't grow forest apparently (bug?)
• logging camp should really have more storage space or some upgrades for storage space
• building menu could be a bit clearer, after 30 hours I still find myself in the wrong menu looking for a certain building, A few times click and build the wrong one too (like in Woodcutter Lodge and logging camp, I keep searching marketplace under trade, things like that)
• i would like to be able to remove trees not only shrubbery, sometimes they clip with buildings
• few times extension was built in the middle of the road if the plot had minimal possible extension/house size

[REDUNDANT] Medify have already updated the practice Qs (however not the QR Skill Trainer) on their site to use these shortcuts:
Alt+C - Open/Clear Calculator (Clears in the same way as backspace would, given that it's already open ofc)
Esc - Close Calculator
C - Shortcut to MCR (single input to Recall, but 2nd input to Clear Memory)
P - Shortcut to M- (subtract the current value displayed from value stored within memory)
M - Shortcut to M+ (add the current value displayed to value stored within memory)
(No Shortcut, but no big deal) X - Shortcut to √ (square root the current value displayed)

Hey there! Im following the instructions to download SillyTavern on android, and the prompt says to press Y/n. I press Y and nothing happens. If I press enter after, it just says Abort. and nothing happens. Did I botch something already? Im new to all this.

Hello, I don't know if this is the right place to ask this kind of questions but I'll try anyway. I want to build a drone with the following specs but I don't know how to calculate it's flight time.
Weight: 1616gr
Fixed Wing Single Motor
Motor: 1100KV, 2150g of MAX Pull, 911W of Max Power
ESC: 70A
Battery: 6500mAh 14.4v
Other electronics total current draw: 600mAh (5V)
I am a newbie so if I forgot to post anything that might be useful feel free to ask.
Thank you in advance
EDIT: u/icebalm calculated the estimated flight time: 6 minutes. The question is: is it a reasonable flight time for an UAV of this dimensions?

Ok, I've posted many times but now I have my own data backed up by Volvo techinian who did his own tests. I mean Volvo confirmed that this is a feature.
I talked to my dealer last week and explained that the car is extremely slow if it has lower charge in colder weather but they said that they are pretty sure it's a feature. So they had a talk with a Volvo techician who did his own tests which match my tests.
The cold weather performance is hilariously bad, like you wouldn't believe how bad it is. It is so bad that people who have problems with it should definitely ask for a partial refund. Remember when I said that in below 10C weather the car loses half of the power if it's cold? Well it's actually 65% or more.
So, the tests we did:

• Car charged to 50% previous evening
• Temperature during the night around 0C and in the morning when we tested, very close to 0C
• Car was not heated apart from the cabin heater (which should heat the battery also a bit)
• We used 10hz GPS
• Performance mode on, ESC off
• Car was driven about 15 minutes before we tested it
• No traction issues or anything else that might skew the results
• Time between 45% and 30% tests around 20 minutes
• Car was driven in total approx. 45minutes and the performance didn't increase significantly even though we floored the car multiple times so it should have warmed up at least a bit

45% charge, (very very slight uphill in the beginning) 0-100 time 9 sec
30% charge, (slight downhill for about half the distance), 0-100 time 8,4sec
We also did some 50-100 tests and 0-50 tests that showed that 0-50 is a bit better than 50-100

• From various tests we calculated that the car has about 110kw in use at these conditions with performance mode
• After 60km/h the power falls off really hard, the acceleration curve goes pretty much flat. So performance is better at 0-60 than 60-100
• Without the performance mode I would estimate the car has something like 90kw in use (in comparison, 90hp Seat Mii felt just a little less powerful)
• Car works fine when it's warm or has closer to full charge

We are gonna do 70% and 60% test next weekend, but with me just driving the car with those charges, it feels like cold takes away at least 30% at higher charges too.
If this is actually how it performs, then it's a total joke and can even be dangerous. I would understand 20% decrease or maybe even 30% decrease, hell I would take a 50% decrease at this point, but without performance mode a 70% decrease in not even sub zero temperatures with almost half a charge is a bit much.
And this is on top of the car having absolutely horrible performance even when the battery is warmed up.
I talked to a EX40 owner who said that with 40% charge, in -22C weather, the car still gets at least half the power if you start it up cold.
To those saying to keep it charged or heat it up. How do you think I came upon these results? I have lot of situations where I have to drive it cold. Also this is soooooooo far from how even other Volvo's perform, that it's just unacceptable. This is some China tier shit.
Edit: Edited some sentences that were said multiple times.

This is my DD of Cereno Scientific.
Disclosure: I own the stock and this is not financial advice but a best effort to provide information and share some own current views as a start for individuals capable of doing their own due diligence. As well as hopefully discuss the case.
TLDR: This is the story of an under the radar Swedish biotech company led by ex big pharma heavy-hitters, partnered with big pharma as well as officially supported by top global key opinion leaders (KOL) within cardiovascular disease (CVD) that has patented an already is a safe, tolerable and established therapeutic since it has been shown to be efficacious against thrombosis, the #1 killer in the world. Furthermore, the company ALSO looks set to outperform established pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) drugs, even the new Sotatercept/Winrevair, which has an estimated $2-9B peak annual sales. Wait until you see the results, including already reported interim data on the majority of the patients in the soon to be completed phase II study.
The serendipitous mistake The founder of Cereno Scientific is Sverker Jern, a renowned Swedish cardiologist with books published about ECG, etc. Long story short, while trying to find out a way to restore the human bodies inherent blood clot preventing system, a "failed" experiment of a postdoc belonging to Jern´s lab led to the discovery that valproic acid (VPA) significantly inhibits HDAC. In turn, this significantly reduces PAI-1 while simultaneously increasing endogenous levels of tPA; both central to combating thrombosis. VPA has been around and used for treating epilepsy, bipolar disease, migraine etc. since the 1960's. While high enough dosages (typically much higher than used here) can come with adverse effects, VPA is established as a safe and tolerable therapeutic still prescribed today. Having developed a unique administration regime for VPA trough delayed-release to reduce PAI-1, which is elevated in the morning, Cereno created it´s first medical candidate, CS1. Since then, it has been shown to be safe and tolerable, reduces the levels of circulating PAI-1 as well as restore the levels of t-Pa in a phase I human trial, without increasing the risk of bleeding. Now, for those not familiar with the hematologic landscape, this is huge. The reason being that ALL existing therapeutics for thrombosis are double-edged swords that do increase this risk, causing considerable consequences for quality of life, not to mention fatal incidents. Coupled with thrombosis as the #1 underlying cause of death globally, it is not for nothing that a potential solution to this has been called the holy grail of medicine.
Global KOL's join Having made the discovery, patented it and demonstrated results in human, the company soon garnered the attention of a number of KOL´s. A scientific advisory board (SAB) was established comprised of leading global experts within CVD. Names such as Deepak Bhatt, Raymond Benza, Bertram Pitt, Faiez Zannad, Gordon Williams and Gunnar Olsson. Do look them all up. On the march towards a subsequent phase II trial for CS1, the course was initially set to directly target the medical indication thrombosis. However, following advice from the SAB, a strategical move to proving an even broader efficacy, shorten the time to market, thus preserving capital and prolonging IP rights, was chosen instead - for now - PAH.
The genius rationale behind proving broader efficacy quicker through PAH Although PAH is classified as a rare disease, the market is extensive and growing rapidly. The pathophysiology is simplified as this: Due to various etiologic backgrounds, a few being genetic, related to vascular fibrosis, inflammation, etc. the pulmonary arteries undergo constant proliferation. As they progressively become narrower, stiffer and less flexible, the pulmonary pressure is raised causing the right-hand side of the heart to also proliferate in order to pump enough oxygenated blood until there is simply no more room at which point the heart fails and the patient dies. Up until a few weeks ago (we will return to this), only simple vasodilators such as PDE5i´s which only temporarily alleviate symptoms, have been prescribed. Now, on top of the anti-thrombotic properties, it has also been established that CS1 has anti-fibrotic, anti-inflammatory, pulmonary pressure-relieving properties as well as reverse-remodeling of underlying pathological vascular changes. As the CEO of Cereno Sten Sörensen states - "CS1 fits like a hand in a glove for PAH". As a parenthesis, Sörensen successfully led the RALES study at Monsanto as well as MERIT-HF at AstraZeneca. Both aimed at expanding the use for already existing compounds, just like with CS1. As an incentive to formulate treatments for rare diseases, the FDA/EMA can grant Orphan Drug Designation (ODD). The benefits, if approved, are multifold but what is of most importance here are simplified regulatory pathways to get to market. For instance, 7 years market exclusivity is also granted but the company already has extensive patents in place. Cereno was granted ODD by the FDA in 2020. If this is deemed as a tactical sound move, the next part ought to be considered a strategical masterclass. First a bit of necessary background to make it understandable: Phase I is to evaluate safety and tolerability. Phase II trials expand on this with a larger patient sample size, as well as incorporate one or a few efficacy markers. The phase II study of Cereno is setup to measure approximately 30 of them. Why? For the sake of keeping this short, CS1 ("optimized" VPA) is an HDACi and it's mode of action is through epigenetic modulation. VPA has already in numerous studies throughout the years been found to positively impact risk markers for several CVD's and research revolving around HDACi's in general has picked up tremendous speed also in areas such as cancer treatment. It is effectively a form of gene therapy. While Cereno has specifically patented VPA, the company has additionally managed to patent ALL forms of HDACi, not only for thrombosis but also for improving endogenous fibrinolysis which could possibly be relevant for all forms of CVD but certainly for several broad indications such as heart failure, myocardial infarction and atherosclerosis. Hence, this phase II study is officially targeting PAH through markers such as mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP) and 6 minute walking distance (6MWD) since everything points to that this should be a fast-forwarded slam dunk - but also incorporates markers relevant for other major indications - including PAI-1 for thrombosis. So, what started off as a mission to prove efficacy for "only" thrombosis has turned into a phase II study that will shine light on an avenue a lot broader, all at once.
In order to demonstrate this, the study participants are evenly distributed across three groups and administered one of three doses:

1. A low dose, the same dose that reduced PAI-1 and showed anti-thrombotic properties, to confirm what was shown in Ph1.
2. The dose shown in animal models to be clinically relevant for PAH by alleviating hypertension and show reverse remodeling capacity.
3. Double the second dose to see whether an even higher dose means more effect and also to possibly show a dose response pattern.

I.e. a "perfect score" would be to demonstrate effects in 33% to 66% of the total number of patients depending on if dose #2 or #3 is enough in human. Regarding safety and tolerability, even the highest dose is lower than what is typically used for treating epilepsy. Furthermore, since PAH is a deadly disease with a very poor prognosis that lacks the possibility of significant spontaneous remission (patients do not get better without intervention, instead tend to progressively get worse), placebo is only formally to be included in the subsequent phase III trial and deemed unnecessary by the FDA in the ongoing Ph2 trial due to the known safety profile of VPA.
Big pharma Abbott partners with Cereno While planning for the phase II trial, Cereno and Abbott announced a mutual partnership for the same to which Abbott is to supply their CardioMEMS HF implanted sensor to Cereno's patients. The implications being multifold but mainly that instead of being bound to a few select measurements through right heart catheterization (RHC), the study now monitors many of the markers in real time. Measuring mPAP with CardioMEMS is highly superior to RHC due to the numerous measurements taken daily in comparison to RHC that is otherwise done only 3-4 times during a full trial. Due to the individual variability in the patients, RHC would demand 4 times as many patients to be able to detect the same difference in mPAP as with CardioMEMS. Further solidifying CardioMEMS as an improved health monitor by choosing Cereno and their extensive study protocol as a partner benefits Abbott.
The patents stand their ground - and Cereno scoops up two additional candidates In 2018, University of Michigan (UoM) filed for a patent for the usage of VPA to treat and/or prevent heart disease. This claim was rejected due to one (WO201605579) of the multiple patent families in place by Cereno. What then took place is beautiful:
​

1. UoM licenses their own medical candidate ML585, renamed to CS585 to Cereno. A prostacyclin (IP) receptor agonist.
   
2. Cereno is contacted by Emeriti Bio, (comprised of a group of legends behind multiple blockbusters such as Losec), and acquires CS014, a next generation VPA analogue. Data points to an even better safety profile than CS1, giving Cereno a potential next, next (2x) generation compound.
   
3. Michael Holinstat at UoM, and the inventor of CS585, has later been engaged as the Director of translational research at Cereno to evaluate these assets through the preclinical stages of development. And both have shown to prevent thrombosis without the risk of bleeding in all research so far. In other words, Cereno is now in possession of what seems to be the only compounds in the world capable of addressing thrombosis without increasing the risk of bleeding. Seemingly three times the holy grail. Data confirming this has since been shown at the worlds most prestigious CVD conferences (ESC, ASH, ACC, BIO-EUROPE, PVRI, NAHC, CVCT, NLSDays, ISTH, EHA, etc.). Patents are already granted for all candidates.
   

“Remarkable!” results Since Cereno has already demonstrated efficacy for thrombosis (PAI-1), this metric should be a given success yet again and are measured once the study nears completion. But let's dive into the ones related to PAH since these are continually measured by the CardioMEMS device: During summer of -23, Cereno was contacted by one of the clinics involved, inquiring Cereno to pursue an abstract at the upcoming American Heart Association congress that was being held November -23. The first patient to complete the trial was done and had what seemed like an astounding improvement in symptoms. Cereno instead opted to communicate the results seen so far to the market. The results from the first patient? 30% reduction in mPAP. 20% improvement in Cardiac Output (CO). Improvement in WHO Functional Class (FC) from II to I, meaning from having debilitating symptoms to basically being able to live a normal life. Judging from the most prominent PAH trials, patients starting from FC III usually yield greater results than the ones starting from II. Meaning that data points to potentially even more efficacy to be tapped than for this patient. Or, as Raymond Benza, knighted director of pulmonary hypertension at Mt. Sinai Hospital in New York and principle investigator of the study and member of Cereno's SAB stated: "We were hoping for a 10% reduction (in mPAP) - here we saw a 30% reduction - That is really remarkable!"
Competitor analysis To keep this short, the only relevant reference to compare CS1 to is Sotatercept (now Winrevair). Approved by the FDA March 26th, it does come with risks of treatment adverse events such as increased risk of bleeding, hypertension, erythrocytosis, etc. but is still a significant step forward for patients suffering from PAH. Central to evaluating efficacy in PAH is PVR and 6MWD. PVR is calculated (PVR=80(mPAP-mPAWP/CO)) once the study is completed. So far there is both mPAP and CO from the first patient. 6MWD is also communicated at study completion. But already in the first patient, Cereno demonstrated better efficacy in PAH for relevant markers than ever previously seen. The important marker CO was not improved at all by Sotatercept. The onset (time from first dose to effects) of CS1 is also quicker. And the administration comes in the form of a pill instead of injectables, which is easier for patients. Furthermore, on March 27th, CNN writes this about Sotatercept: “In animal studies conducted before the human trials, the drug looked like it could do more than just treat symptoms: It seemed like it might be able to stop the thickening of the blood vessels and perhaps prolong patients’ lives, but those benefits have not been proven in humans.” Now back to what Dr. Raymond Benza has to say about CS1 on the subject: "Our effect on resistance was much more than what would be expected just with the effect in cardiac output. That means that this vessel is actually remodeling, and the resistance is coming down through a change in architecture of the vessel. That is really exciting to me".
Also, CS1 did all this in half the time compared to Sotatercept (12 vs 24 weeks).
A fluke? Interim findings are in and the answer is unequivocally no The apparent question surfaced - Exceptional results, but was this a one-time fluke? During fall of -23, Cereno announced interim findings (as a part of a DQCR) for 16 of the to be 30 patients including the following (in ""):
​

1. "More than 60% of patients on CS1, all doses included, have a sustained reduction in mPAP." In other words, somewhere around 100% of the patients aimed for in a best case scenario.
   
2. "An efficacy response compatible with a dose-response pattern." Being an open study, it would be logical to deduce that there seems to be three distinct differences in dose-response, as per the dosage protocol.
   
3. *"Several patients with a reduction in mPAP of similar or greater magnitude as the initial Patient Case".*This speaks for itself.
   
4. "The DQCR indicates an early onset of action". Patient #1 saw onset at 6 weeks but here is stated that "this early onset was observed already after 3 weeks for several patients". In comparison, onset for existing PAH medications apart from simple vasodilators is typically 12-15 weeks.
   
5. "The DQCR showed a sustained reduction of mPAP in the 2-week follow-up period after the 12-week period of therapy with CS1 was discontinued." Indicating that a remodeling effect on the vessels has indeed taken place trough epigenetic modulation.
   

Again, the literature is clear; Patients with PAH just tend to get worse and simply do not see these results without intervention.
Cereno is granted "Compassionate use" by the FDA Having continued to demonstrate remarkable results also in the interim analysis, Cereno communicated to the market that they were now receiving even more inquiries from the clinics involved in the current study. This time stemming from a wish from both patients and treating clinicians to be able to continue with CS1 after the study ends. Expanded access/compassionate use, can be granted when faced with a severe condition where no good alternative medications exist, and if the FDA deems the demonstrated benefits as good enough. Cereno applied late -23. The FDA approved in January -24 and by this time Cereno also communicated that they now had been informed that the majority of the patients in the study would like to be able to continue with CS1. Apart from already being obvious exceptional news, this enables Cereno to generate a dataset for CS1 orders of magnitude more vast, since it will be possible to study even longer term results already now during phase II. As some may know, the dataset is everything when it comes to value.
Risks & critique What if the phase II study fails? CS1 and its pioneering approach has already been documented to show significant decrease in PAI-1 in human and has shown proof of concept in preclinical models in PAH by reducing the pressure in the vessels and achieving reverse remodeling. The company has also already communicated findings related to PAH for the majority of the patients in the current study which further support the findings seen in the preclinic. Look at them. Now do your own due diligence.
Why so cheap? The answer is probably twofold. First, although Cereno has operations in the US and the current study only uses US clinics, it is a Swedish biotech company still flying under the radar. There is a Swedish discord for the stock with some knowledgeable MD´s, scientists, etc. trying to explain what is going on but the majority of retail investors don’t seem to understand. Which brings us to second; institutional and professional investors typically enter post phase II results. According to Cereno, there is also already great interest from potential partners/buyers but the same goes here - phase II results first. The BoD and Management of Cereno have greatly increased their ownership exposure ever since presenting the results for patient #1 last year
Delay? Following Covid 19, there were administrative difficulties in starting up the nine clinics for the phase II trial resulting in the study being postponed and initial patient recruitment was also slow. To mitigate this, Cereno announced two additional clinics. The last of which should now be starting up at any time, since the company recently disclosed which one it is - Mt. Sinai Hospital, New York. Topline results are to be presented in Q3. The study is 12 weeks and had 26/30 patients enrolled by the last update in February. Hence, study completion could be delayed but given that only a maximum of 4 patients remain to be enrolled before end of June, it seems unlikely today. Since capital runway exists until spring -25, this should pose no vital threat regardless.
"Too much communication"? This is the only possibly negative feedback I've seen that has not yet been disproven. While I do think that many press releases in a short amount of time can sometimes pose more questions than they answer, in my opinion, this is not the case here. Having read them all, and while I do understand that not everyone is interested in which new country a patent has been accepted in or what events the the company will be attending, the rest is vital information. Cereno also sends copies of all press releases in English as well as Swedish, doubling the amount.
Wrapping up This only scratches the surface. If you are of a curious nature, maybe you will find interest in possible pieces to this puzzle such as that big pharma Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) was engaged in buyout talks with Acceleron (Sotatercept) that was instead acquired by Merck. That Deepak Bhatt sits on the board of BMS - And now also in the SAB of Cereno.
But if nothing else, I think the following speaks for itself: The total addressable market (TAM) for PAH is projected to reach $12B by 2030.
The closest thing to a competitor (Sotatercept/Winrevair) was sold for approximately $7B after phase II. $8B today, adjusted for inflation. At the time of the acquisition, peak future sales was thought to come in at $2B. Since then, revised projections upwards of $9B have been made. The current market cap of Cereno Scientific is around $100M. Without speculating what a fair value should really be, that´s already a difference of around 80x. And compared to a lower peak sales than more recent projections. Plus, this is only from PAH, not counting thrombosis, with a TAM of 6x that of PAH. Cereno has already proven that CS1 can achieve results in PAH seen by no other therapeutic. And has already disclosed findings for the majority of the patients. The Phase II trial now only has a few patients left to recruit before completion.Cereno holds two additional candidates aimed at targeting thrombosis without bleeding, both seemingly unique and holding up so far. The TAM for thrombosis is projected to reach $70B by 2030. If Cereno replicates results for CS1 and PAI-1 a fourth(!) time, it would mean that their current PAH study also validates CS014 for thrombosis to quite some extent. Remember, they are both VPA. Bottom line – There are multiple shots at multiple staggering markets from one single study about to be completed – and the results so far are stellar.