The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma 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.
Pump to dump
Well back to where we were so if we go up further by tomorrow's close then all it will take is to continue after Monday without reftracing significantly next week and we will have made history. lol
That'll turn my frown upside down. Hot to manage it yet, but it's possible.
Someone wants some shares ... I just did a dummy sell and they'll take over 300k in one hit ...
Twix, maybe you're going to get your rise into results ... and hopefully without the slump afterwards!
Start-ups Trigger Major Disruptions in NIPT Space with Novel Testing Formats backed by Hefty Funding
The competition spectrum of non-invasive prenatal testing is highly fragmented with scope for novel aspirants intending major disruptions in noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) space. In a recent development, a San Diego based new market player, Cradle Genomics has affirmed its success in amassing a whopping $17.1 million to aid optimal research dedicated towards NIPT. The company is likely to successfully launch its novel NIPT tests as a significant step, furthering scope in non-invasive prenatal testing market. Such ongoing advances are likely to direct sustainable returns in global non-invasive prenatal testing market in forthcoming years.
Further in non-invasive prenatal testing space, leading companies are gaining strong grounds on the back of diverse business associations and strategies. In this regard, Thermo Fisher Scientific is all set to use it's liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry testing platform in tandem with NeXosome of NX Prenatal. The companies are poised to develop highly effective non-invasive prenatal testing measures to ensure safe and healthy fetal development.
Emerging countries such as India is at the infancy of NIPT adoption. In a recent development, Thyrocare technologies that has made biochemistry tests and diagnostics mainstream in the country is likely to further disrupt noninvasive prenatal testing space in the country. The company is vocal about limiting the massive prices of NIPT in India, bringing it down to around eight thousand rupees. The development is believed to enlarge the scope of NIPT in the country with several physicians and expecting parents undertaking the same.
No downside........ Just the daily retrace instead of appreciating in run up to Results. Day 3.
Disappointing. It must all be priced in at 13p with little buying interest. I like a rising price with no downside trend as we approach results as usually post announcement we also drop. Always hope this time will be different. It hasn't been so yet.
Often the quicker the results are published the better they are and 2 months is quite good. One of the figures for me is the profit/loss. I think we will be broadly neutral and then on course to double last years revenue and be profitable for the year.
How much of that is already baked into the sp remains to be seen. I can't actually see any downsides at the moment.
Granted there's a wee bit of poetic license in describing a retrace lol
However in the run up to Results and assuming they are anticipated as good by the market it's not reassuring for sp to have gone down last 2 days. It's reminiscent of the usual anti-climax for anticipated news. Hope just for once that's wrong!
Let's see the sp rise into results and continue up next week. That would be a first actually.
retrace?
It's embarrassing to see you fawn over mainly unsupportive comment.
I'll try some.....
It would be nice to see a rising share price in the run up to Results, wouldn't it. Lets see if we can arrest the retrace by Friday.
Excellent post notaflipper. Your analysis is much deeper than mine. When we bought Elucigene I did note that their sales had been flat for the previous 2 years but it was the product range and the territories that I welcomed. As regards dilution I have to say that it hasn't effected me. I got here from the Vialogy days but have done top-ups since. In November '17 and January '18 I bought at 4.8p and in October '17 at 7.4p In all my spend has been 9.5K and todays value is 14K. Last December, for a few weeks only I hasten to add, the sp was at 7p and I nearly topped-up again but I missed the boat.
I agree that mistakes have been made but my current view is that the NIPT sales will lift the company anyway and we now have other products to develop and sell. I also like the new US initiative. I'm looking forward to Rees next performance re the half year figures and business update on the 2nd of December.
I think these presentations are one of the best ways to spread the word about our progress - although rising revenues don't half help. Now we have a range of products in a very wide market it is I think a little more difficult to issue an RNS news of sales agreements because in theory we should be making quite a lot of them! However I did like the awareness event held in Egypt last March which included customers. Again thanks for your insight.
Couple of slight conveniences here. Although the share price was 7.5p when Lynn Rees took over on 4th July 2018 it went up to 15.25p on the 18th Sep and a morning high of above 16p+ on the 19th Sep when the litigation news broke. Although some PIs got spiked they are not heard from as they subsequently sold through a botched placing (under Lynn Rees) which raised £3m towards the litigation settlement expenses by issuing 22m new shares at 10p. This was at a price considerably less that the sp prior to the litigation announcement however for those that are brave to remember it was this was a considerably cruel turn of events for LTHs whom had stood by the Company through a series of public and private misrepresentations.
Of the circa £16m TMO debt, while it is true that Life Technologies wrote off £12.7 million of loans there was a share expansion of over 41,356,165 ordinary shares (at 9.2 pence per share). The resulted in a sale of £3.8 million which was used to reduce loan balance outstanding to Life Technologies. YGEN now also pay a modest commission on sales within Southeast Asia under the new commercial agreement described below, up to a cap of £6.5 million which has been reflected in the accounts as a liability.
The rise in the number of shares from 188m in 2015 to 574m now in issue was massively expanded by a placing of 110,540,841m for Elucigene. Idiosyncratically though more than the 22m (litigation) placing it didn't have the same catastrophic negative impact. Disappointingly Elucigene sales seem flat adding and has once again added to the BoD and Management Team where a more than required % of the employees are Directors.
Despite the current uptrend and a some background buying following the investor roadshow there is still too little interest given the amount of time these roadshows have been underway. With little impetus and communication supplied from the company to drag itself to past highs of 20p+ where most LTHs wish to get to cash out, it makes past targets mentioned of 50p by some a ridiculous target. The sp has been oscillating within a swing holding pattern between 10.8 to 13.5 since Feb and it is embarrassing to read of the excitement of some LTHs to get to 14p when frankly the sp has not done much this year.
There is little excuse for the Company not to respond to the public criticism on the lack of commercial progress given that a new broker and communication team have been appointed. I suspect that this works might work in its future in the coming months by allowing a future placing to be undertaken internally so as not to repeat 2018 events. With over 25% equity and 10% options the Directors only need a little bit of a top up in order to be able to still accept a 'low-ball' offer in the next two years. Till then I am afraid not much to get excited about.
Hi Steve67 I don't think there has been a change of policy exactly but the company has moved on to be an entirely different animal. While the Illumina litigation was ongoing the only good news was the signing up of new Labs in new territories for our one product.
Stephen Little recruited Rees and once he was aboard within a couple of months we went from being an Illumina litigant to an Illumina licencing partner and Hayden Jeffeys was also aboard. I don't think that was entirely coincidental given the due diligence that Rees says he undertook and his past history in the business.
From that moment on things evolved rapidly - the name change - the cancellation of debt - the fund raise and purchase of Elucigene. The whole thing was done in some 9 months or so. Once we had acquired Elucigene we doubled our territories and added some 36 products to our one. This was when we stopped announcing NIPT tests in new territories - after all it was only one of over thirty products in a territory we were already in curtesy of Elucigene.
It's a great story and the doubling of the SP in the last 12 months shows the market is on board.
Did the change of policy on annoucements occur around the time of the Illumina agreement / settlement? Just wondering if there's some connection or (as a long shot) even something in the agreement about appearing to promote TF ...
Suggest we leave it there as before you bring up another company example. The core point is a very basic one of good productive newsflow to the market and keeping investors updated. In terms of contract news we have stopped. Results and common sense asks why. END
Not often if at all. That's not the point. The point is that the market can derive a broad value of the contract and number of tests has been mentioned. Don't get bogged down in arguing over rns detail when it's easy enough to differentiate between a small medium or large contract.
So if a broad contract value can be derived then your point is null. That is the point I was making which means material contract rns would impact the sp all other things being equal and further detail therein would assist - if we ever announced anything!
I think Goggins was correct. You just don't seem to understand or take a step back into common sense. It would be more likely to increase shareholder value if in the last 18 months we had supplied contract newsflow for our landgrab and a narrative to the rise in nipt revenue just like all other companies do for must must appear to you to be strange reasons. lol Once upon a time we too announced contracts and my point isnt that we shouldnt be selective but that either there arent any worth announcing for 18 long months !! Needs explanation? or we are not prepared to - then why not? Needs explanation. You simply want to exvuse it and would rather not ask. If so I am dumbfounded.
Twix. I quote you from your 13.50 today. "Contracts will have a valid ascribed but not an exact value and it will usually be based on anticipated or known number of tests. It is this value which can be stated and I think occasionally has been"
"Occasionally has been" is a little vague. How often would you say Premaitha has stated a contract figure?
Yes a contract can anticipate a number of tests and consequentially can anticipate a cash value. But because it's not exactly definitive it's pretty useless really - how could you sue if something goes wrong? The other side would defend by saying the figurers were guess work which didn't pan out. If you can't sue for breach because the figures are wooly there's no point in the contract. Just have an agreement.
"Occasionally has been" is a little vague. How often would you say Premaitha has stated a contract figure?
Typo
Contracts will have a value ascribed or calculated etc.
P.s. value of a contract can be calculated and sp would react accordingly if details given, which they could be if we chose to and of course if we ever announced any contract wins in the first place but we don't!
Contracts will have a valid ascribed but not an exact value and it will usually be based on anticipated or known number of tests. It is this value which can be stated and I think occasionally has been. Contracts have a known value even if not a specific one . Much of what you say imv is simply hiding what could be stated if there was a will to do so. In isolation and ALL other things being equal then of course if a.n.other company issues multi million pound contracts over year(s) then the sp would benefit. I don't need to get into species of another company whose situation I know nothing about. Common sense tells us material contract wins with revenue should increase the sp no matter if you can find spefific example where it did not. That would be for spefic reasons too and the exception rather than the rule. Next you'll tell me the more revenue we make the lower the sp. Just use common sense rather than exceptional example.
Hi Florida yes I do agree that all of us should consider the various points but forward. Unfortunately twix has failed to grasp my point about contracts. Our sales model is more akin to a licencing model rather than a contractual model as I'll hopefully demonstrate.
We sign agreements to process our tests with Labs. No sales take place no revenue is generated so no contract. We then sign agreements with doctors and clinics for then to offer our tests to patients. Again no sales take place no revenue is generated so no contract. The clinic offers our test to a patient who agrees to the test. This agreement may well be contractual as a fee - the "consideration" will be paid. Both the patient and the doctor/clinic also have "capacity" to carry out the procedure but if it is contractual it will be between them.
Money then flows from the patient to the doctor/clinic on to the Lab and then on to us. I hope this explains why It is impossible for Yourgene, or indeed any body else, to put a value on the agreement they signed with the lab at the point of signing. I don't believe they ever did. This is why I also asked Goggins about the value of "X" because he thought there was a financial threshold that had to be crossed. I don't see how there could be given the sales model as above.
twix also refused to consider my point re TPG by again asserting that ALL notable contracts increase the sp. TPG signed multiple contracts with blue chip customers for millions of £s with no real effect on the SP for 2 years. He refused to except this in spite of it being factual.
To close. I'm not against opinions being posted as opinions, that is one reason why the board is here. However I am against opinions posted as facts.
Thanks for some supporting words Florida. Appreciated.
Yes, Eucligene can certainly be viewed in terms of a landgrab. It is NOT the landgrab I refer to as LR had stated after litigation settlement that with resources freed we could concentrate on a nipt landgrab. It is that landgrab to which I also have been refering and to which we may well be making progress as noted from results. My displeasure is with not informing shareholders or the market along the way for 18 months or thus not taking the time to add shareholder value with the names and financials this would highlight along the way. Don't get me wrong as it took me a year of silence before I really started to wonder why and now at 18 months! That others do not find this unusual with all the many aspects I have mentioned is more a reflection on them and fools like natdan. There may well be a plausible and fine explanation, but that I meet such resistance and utter stupidity (natdan) is as disappointing as it is predictable. Aimho
Nice to see a few thoughtful and considered posters remain (Florida, Gogins)
None of us should forget the days of Vialogy when Twix played what could be deemed as the saving grace to many investors who could have lost far more. He screamed from the rafters for months if not years that something was wrong and no one listened, including me. So we must not judge on our predetermined view of someone based on a few remarks that we don't like. The proper constructive attitude should be to embrace what is said and question at all times what is presented to us. Twix plays a healthy critical role in deducting the true accountability of the company we invest in and we should not trivialise or ignore anything that is said.
Twix - your emphasis on the disclosure of contract wins is flawed to some extent in the fact that the "Land grab" took place with the purchase of Eucligene. Instead of venturing out targeting individual clients, Euligene presented us with ready made clients with the door already open. So in effect, new client contracts had already been established. It was then just a matter of selling additional products the to the already affiliated. The land grab to that effect was already fulfilled.