Our live Investing Matters Podcast Special which took place at the Master Investor Show discussing 'How undervalued is the UK stock market?', has just been released. Listen here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
For those who don't know Premaitha became Yourgene following a takeover.
The other point the doc is still obsessed with is that of a "moat".
I'm not sure if doc understands the term properly - I did try to help doc by giving a link to the respected website and article on Investopedia:
"...refers to a business' ability to maintain competitive advantages over its competitors in order to protect its long-term profits and market share from competing firms."
Now doc is implying that Ygen may get a moat because it has a 2 gene test with a super sequence.
But the definition is for a business that can "maintain" it's competitive advantages over its competition. If you're referring to the UK companies then yes Nova does have a moat because it is far ahead of Ygen Genedrive and Avacta and they do not pose a threat yet as they have no sales from covid tests yet or to any significant degree and it will be some time before they are able to "catch up" hence Nova moat if you want to argue for a moat, is protected.
Please read the Investopedia article as it explains what a moat is.
Doc (allegedly).
Imv your"forensics" don't go far enough. If they had you would have known by undertaking some very simple research that Yourgene do not own the IP to the NIPT it's licenced from Illumnia following patent infringement litigation which YGEN lost, hardly a ringing endorsement for Ygen tech as you suggest:
https://www.yourgene-health.com/about/press-releases/20-news/1441-19-september-2018-legal-settlement-and-licence-agreement-with-illumina
Your next statement also shows that your "research" has not been to a "forensic" level as you state as follows:
"If as has been suggested they can test for two sequences of SARS-CoV-2 I would not be surprised."
It's not a rumour and no need to be surprised as they say as such in their RNS if you had bothered to read it:
"The CE-IVD version will have two viral targets and assay controls, making it more desirable from the reimbursement perspective across several European regions"
Some existing tests use more than one gene whereas Nova's is based on one - you must have known this already when you said in several earlier posts that Nova has the best test? Why would 2 gene tests now change your opinion of Nova having the best test the 2 gene test as I say is not a new development?
Your next point is that Nova may have given them the "sequence". I didn't know that Nova were in the charitable business. The burden of proof is on the one making the allegation to prove it - presumably you can refer the investors here to your evidence for this assertion? If not it's just more nonsense from you.
Your next assertion is that because Nova may have given them their own sequence then they would have been able to further improve the test.
The only information in Ygen' s RNS about the accuracy which I could see is:
"Preliminary data has shown the test to have 100% specificity."
There is no mention of sensitivity figures.
What do you mean by "better" that the accuracy will be greater than 100% for both sensitivity and specificity? That's not mathematically possible is it? Nova are already at 100% for both sensitivity and specificity.
I had said earlier that I was not worried by your investment analysis and now I'm also wary of your alleged expertise in pandemic science care to mention the papers you have written?
I have no medical or scientific background but it was relatively easy to unpick your arguments and you claim to be an expert.
More like throw in some medical terms and mumbo jumbo and baffle them with the science = achieve objective by confusion.
I don't believe you are a "doc" as a real doc who has worked in the NHS which Nova are supporting (do you recall the 5 pillars?) would not come on a board to try to cause people anxiety, fear and depression; I didn't think medical professionals did that. NHS staff are caring professionals.
Anyway hopefully you can post something with some real substance and science behind it next time.
Seadoc, why would NCYT give YGEN their sequences? Makes no sense unless they receive a cut of the test produced...
96 companies if only successful with one lot, could be 24 each with four lots.
Still sounds very high no of companies . Await sight of said doc. GlA this week
It's not just for tests there is infrastructure involved .
That seems very strange though as that’s spread between 96 companies. Surely they’d go with the best product and value.
Sorry I thought it was 52million tests.
The good thing is we could complete that, it’s 8.6million tests per month. The problem is there’s only room for 3.7 companies if each gets 4 lots at £6.50 per test. Competition will be fierce.
Hi, see the post at 22.40 ish on ODX board, I know no more then that and couldn't recall anyone here mentioning it previously.
Kaeren, if that’s the case it’s still £1.35billion based on £6.50 tests. Not to be sniffed at.
Does anyone have a copy of the tender doc, post ODX Trickym says he will post there tomoz, max 4 lots per company, max lot value 52mm???????