Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video 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.
Greene, it would certainly do the share price no harm if Cathal was to flag up these once off exceptional costs which we are forced to guess at. I.e. a confirmed net profit of £12M for 2022 for instance would means the current sp at 23p would be cheap with a PE of circa 12
Other think Aquae of course is Imutex and Prep - the latter doesn’t seem far off and with assumed move to US SPAC, no idea on costs - but must be sucking up some cash.
Simple why it is here.
1]Covid contract delay
2] spin off delay
One PI dumping so others follow.
So a fewsell up to come back later.
If the reverse of the above it would be over 30p which plus POLB would make the position fine.
Bit like POLX - got a date and peeps see an initial rise and pile in.
Not rocket science - nothing to do with results at all.
I was unsure on that one too Aquae…there are a few thoughts that came to mind after Monday’s presentation…but only personal opinion…
1) CHIM development- Malaria, TB, Pneumococcas
2) Covid lag - spending but not seeing significant revenue yet
3) Additional site / site conversion - mentioned additional 9 beds in Whitechapel clinic, and assuming this will be done this FY.
4) Leo mentioned about further pharma accreditation’s etc… I assume that costs…got the impression they are wanting to build greater credibility, whether that is with one eye on the US market?
5) Main one for me is DiM - personal view, to take raw data and commercialise it - bring in data scientists (or outsource) to make it usable, create database environment, portal / user interface, licensing structure etc…, I think is costly… now it might be that it is all done post split, but my view is that this is going on in the background now…to RNS about the capability a few months back is a bit odd if you aren’t now developing it, it must be taking significant investment to bring to life…
As I say, just my musings…
Thanks for the response Greend. I guess I am puzzled by the half year report RNS comment that "Year-end cash balances expected to close in line with the half year position of £14.9m" if profits are now rolling in regularly on a monthly basis, hence why if would be useful to see the new breakeven point?
Well done Green. Good to see some assumption backed figures. They seem prudent enough.
Hi Aquae,
My basic understanding…not sure if it helps…
1) A site costs £1.5m to convert, I know CF has mentioned it’s paid by others, let’s assume it isn’t.
2) I thought I’d seen a rent figure of £30k a month - someone correct me, if you disagree.
So c £2mn for the two above, worst case.
3) Staffing wise, they have approx 200 staff at the moment, if we assume 50 staff per incremental site at fully loaded salary of £60k, £3mn there.
4) Running costs - difficult to establish - but if we use FY20 accounts…Inventories, PPE, Volunteer costs, agency costs etc… c £2mn increment.
That gets us to £7mn.
If they can run 4 studies a site per annum at conservative £6mn (I know we’ve seen higher), that gets us to £24mn. Even if costs above are out by 50% it should be comfortably profitable.
As per my note this am, this business imv is dependent on increased contract values (would have been tighter at £4mn a contract), and more so being well utilised - partial utilisation at Hvivo of old @ 40% is what crippled it. Pipeline doesn’t appear to be an issue so good utilisation, decent contract values and then achieving scale from costs like screening centres, CHIM development, IT etc… “should” only see it moving in one direction, imho…
Give me a chinese ping pong match anyday rather than this childish tit for tat!
Deepjoy has highlighted a gap in the recent presentation material surrounding the breakeven point for the company following the acquisition of additional facilities which will have driven up the fixed costs. Having reviewed the Oct 2020 presentation when there was only one 24 bed clinic available, there was a slide that showed the breakeven point for Challenge Study Clinics at £13M which equated to 3-4 studies at a utilisation rate of 45%. It would be useful if Cahill published an up-to-date breakeven slide showing the new breakeven point so that it would be easier for investors to anticipate future profits. Interesting to note at the time the non-covid near time pipeline was forecast at £160M, whilst non-covid forecasts for 2021 and 2022 combined is now only £90M
This is better than watching a Chinese ping pong match!
one thing is clear from this exchange ... I overestimated you that's for sure. Whether people agree with me or not is not something that concerns me but the value for me is them seeing you in all your glory...
oh so he paid listing / advisor costs for he own assets ahead of time has he ?
"Orph can decide to open new clinics in the choice of 4 hotels it has already located around the QMB site. That means staff can be shared between the sites with the QMB being the hub for it all." pie in the sky and ad hoc hopes.. and you call me clueless if that your strategy or his .. who knows either way it is hardly a sustainable growth strategy... And all by sharing staff... classic
dream on Ryan... time will tell. 15m capex to support gorwth is a drop in the ocean especially given he is spending some on disposals.. You have no clue and don't read with context do you just call people liars. And if you read slowly I didnt state that he would raise I stated that if he was looking to grow. Plenty of transparency ? laughable .. he feeds what he wants you to hear and then fudges the issue at year end as he has before.... you are completely taken in.
So you now answer a direct as I have done and not a fag packet reply.. how is growth and decent profit levels going to be achieved without significant capex?
Ryan .. I refer you to my earlier post. Insitutional investors can provide capital to expedite growth. Clearly with the balance sheet the way it is there is no sufficient cash or a desire to expand service facilities outside current ad hoc arranegments. So here we are the claimed 'fast growing' company strategy is dependent on ad hoc arrangements, short leases and little capex at exactly the same time that the CEO harps on about massive pharma spend on HCS and pharma services in the decade ahead. Cathal cannot achieve any such level of growth from any free cash flow in the future and so we are left with the waiting lists for clinic space and a ceiling to revenues in that space. So it is clear to me that either Cathal is running this on his original do up and sell strategy or may raise periodically and try to grow that way. There is no transparency and no large investors to support capex as II's do. There it is and that is my bear case on the CEO claims and how they don't seem achievable or realistic at this stage. No clear strategy just talk
and your apology ?
patience Ryan there you go emotional one
Jeepers ok if need me to spell it out... Institutional investors will do due diligence and meet with the company and board and employ their own analysts to support their decision making. This provides more transparency for the market other than a house broker coming out with target prices and forecasts ( in this case changing the formula for valuations last year). So this in turn give more confidence to investors and greater accountability for the board. what we have hear is a situation where the board are not as accountable and hence we get promises, smoke and mirrors. The question remains, why aren't institutional investors piling in to a fast growing pharm services company? Why are retail investors his main audience. Your welcome
The majority of the turnover is non Covid and margins improved from 4% to 28% - do you check facts before you post??
Ricky - I disagree with you. the growth in turn over was during a pandemic with facilities made available to them by government and yet the margins, even it that supportive environment ermmmm?
You assume you are the only one who has the intelligence to string a sentence together... how arrogant are you. Those are my words and if you do not know the value of strategic investors then you are not as intelligent as even I thought.
To be quite honest Deepjoy you have been proved wrong when you stated that there aren't any Institutional investors and you are trying to squirm out of it by moving the goalposts.
Secondly you say the accounts are no good which is clearly wrong - fantastic growth in Turnover and now EBITDA profitable and more growth to come. (plenty of cash on the balance sheet and no debt)
You will counter this by saying why is the share price down - that is because CF is overly bullish and the outcomes have been good but not to his excitable level hence sentiment is low at the moments
Ryan - we know these idiots just try and wind up long term holders
Strictly... I have no beef with the company and you may be right but there is a need to keep ones eyes wide open and not follow people on here or CEOs blindly. There is always a bear case and this board would benefit greatly from discussing it and not dismissing other posters are dishonest, or looking for a lower entry which, I may say is pathetic and such a typical response. It like being a debating society where only one side get to speak. Earache did make a silly post but some of his posts actually have merit and deserve closer scrutiny in fairness.
Deepjoy - no issues with contrary views. They just become so diminished when vitriolic and personal. You’ve posted good stuff in the past which I have valued. I too have issues with much of the CF rhetoric but on balance what ORPH has is bigger than him and in time my bets are on a much larger and more profitable entity.
By the way I reckon there are many sitting on the sidelines with cash ready to pounce. This is feeling like the bottom or very close to it now.