Adrian Hargrave, CEO of SEEEN, explains how the new funds will accelerate customer growth 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.
Https://youtu.be/fgeTZvm6XRc?si=ZYV_9krDVws3wWvX
Over and over confirmed they have enough capital to go into cash positive by H2 2025
Greg had two choices the other day - be brutally honest about the chances of being cash positive by H2 2025 without further resources and see the share price implode / remain at 1p max or go with the narrative that yes they have enough capital to reach cash positivity by H2 2025 and hope the market buys it.
The latter is, technically, true. They do have enough but what wasn't shared was the monumental improvement that would need to be seen quarter on quarter from here to mid 2025 i both prescriptions written and net price. I think the chances are probably 1% but as long as it's feasible he has a get out clause by saying that was the hope but events haven't unfolded the way we hoped and so here's the placing - at some point later in 2024.
HarChris has hit the bail on the head once again.
RIZ29, we all know your game, many like you have come before then suddenly dissappear. You can ramp to the cow's come but it doesn't change the facts. SWK are the king makers here, not forgetting that AOP might be up to something.
A 1% rise in prescriptions Q on Q isn't going to cut it.
LMAO! We know numbers were off cause of Texas and will be fixed. You know it. Stop trying to steal peoples shares
At this stage prescriptions should have been at 60k followed by about 80k in q2 - if you think Texas explains that, fine.
@smythsmoneybox
The reason to disappear from this chat room is having to deal with people like you . Constant negativity . Makes one wonder why you are here in first place if you feel so strongly about how bad this company is . LSE chat rooms are just too toxic
Did you just ignore the whole cash flow positive next year part?
Many want cheaper shares. Can’t blame them. They will be the biggest cheerleaders soon after they rob others of their shares
The Texas issue was classic smokes and mirrors by Greg. To use it as the reason for poor Q1 2024 sales is deluded. I went back and looked at their slide (yes their own slide) and Greg's words didn't seem to fit with the data they showed. So a person left in Texas that impacted Medicaid sales. In Q4 2023 total Texas sales were 9,400 and in Q1 2024 they dropped to 6,700, a total drop of roughly 2,700 or 28%.
This drop incidentally was not just due to Medicaid, the graph shows the non-Medicaid sales also dropped, although Greg ignored this.
So if Texas didn't have an issue sales would have been say 3k higher and total sales in period would have increased from 28,800 to 31,800. So the increase percentage quart to quarter would have increased from the actual 1% to c 11%.
As we were expecting c50% increases they are still well off.
The breakeven in Q2 2025 are just words. As has previously been mentioned if the CEO had any confidence in his own words he'll be buying shares at these silly prices - he earns well over £500k a year.
LMAO. It’s not working, bud.
Riz - did you have a read of what I posted in response to your request for the source of min rev covenants? what are your thoughts on that?
Hi JAllis,
Yes I have found the information and read it. So I have fired an e-mail to the company to clarify their position as they repeatedly confirmed that they do not need to raise.
Thanks.
I think the key point they need to answer is are they in breach of the minimum revenue covenants for the trailing 4 quarters to Q1'24 (which, based on the numbers they have provided, I believe they are), if so by how much and will they be raising 2x that amount as is stipulated in their agreement with SWK when a breach occurs - if not why not.
Will be interesting to hear what they say
But every prediction and promise Greg has made has been broken. Why is it true this time?
Um, maybe cause the audited financials confirm it ? Lol. No one is going to sell here. Just manipulating going on here to steal peoples shares.
I think you'll find the audited annual report is delayed to next week - yes that will be a bit more illuminating.
I agree Shandy about Gregs "coyness" regarding buying shares - despite his substantial package.
He talks a great story but he would be infinitely more credible if he bought a substantial number of shares-which clearly provide much confidence in our ability to reach targets set & survival.The only reason for him not buying ( or Santosh) is that what they say is not necessarily what they expect the outcomes to be.STX is clearly in the "not for widows & orphans" camp but their lack of buying means it is further down the line than that .
Looks like someone building a position lots of 250k buys.
Still waiting on response from management to reply to my e-mail.
I think a number of people will be interested in hearing the response they give you. If/when they come back to you.
Got to be so much more careful in writing than in spoken form.
Anyway, for you uber bulls, it looks like today was a good opportunity for you to buy more!
All those stolen shares by the nasty, manipulating MM's, eh? Lol.
I was just listening to the presentation again , from 12 min onwards - they talk about revenue covenant has been revised with KWS (slide 14) . And they can meet financial obligation until they go cash flow positive (also confirms year end audit is almost complete and figures will remain unchanged). And then again on slide 21 (28mins )
46 mins in - they confirm cash flow positive without raising any capital.
Still would be good to get e-mail explanation from management.
You’re missing the point either intentionally or unintentionally.
When Greg says they ‘can’ reach cash flow positive with the resources they have he is technically correct, it is possible, as are most things in life. Is it realistic though? The answer to that is without doubt no as is well explained by a few other posters.
They are way, way off the targets set by the brokers which lays out the path to profitability. Previously when on track Greg and the management pointed us to the broker notes time and time again yet now they have totally come off that path he can’t speak for the broker targets? Isn’t that inconsistent?
The focus on Texas was evidently an attempt to mask the real situation but it’s been debunked by a poster on here. Yes Texas lost them some scripts but it explains only a fraction of the missed (broker) targets, it doesn’t fill the gap that is needed in any way whatsoever.
So yes they ‘can’ reach cash flow positive by h2 2025 with the resources they have but this sales team that’s been fully trained and at max capacity for the past six months need to suddenly start seeing ~30% increases quarter on quarter all the way to mid 2025. Come on, do you really believe that is going to happen or is it more likely Greg is hoping to raise off the back of this language?
And don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying a placing is coming next week, it isn’t. I strongly believe plan A is continue as if things are much better than they actually are, keep pushing for improvement in prescriptions written and net selling price and if all comes good great, if not leverage the expectation by placing alongside the next quarterly results at, ideally, 2p for £15m worth. Heavy dilution but one more chance at the last chance saloon.
But if they are honest about the likely scenario to play out that 2p/£15m is impossible and off the table and there won’t be another chance - see the incentive for them to deploy deception ?
I am not missing the point- trying to understand what they meant by revised covenant and also confirmed they don’t need to do an equity raise .
You're using IMC so go to the interims presentation from less than seven months ago...
Look at slide 18, estimated annual prescriptions for 2024 - 'greater than 350,000'. Now apparently that was only a broker target and not their own and they've disassociated themselves from it but it was in their own slides not long ago!!
Page 22, 'achieve cash flow positive by YE 2024, revenues expected to exceed $120m by 2025' - that $120m requires around 500,000 prescriptions at ~$220 net Rx + milestone payments/royalties. In other words by next Q1 they'd need prescriptions to rise from 28000 to over 100,000 and still growing QoQ!
You can believe their word all you like but the last target for reaching cash flow positive was pushed back months after it was made - is it that likely to suddenly be achieved now when the numbers are so, so far off what they were estimating not long ago?
As for confirming they don't need an equity raise how about the presentation in April 2023 where in one slide it clearly states 'Fully funded to support operations through to cash flow break-even by YE 2024' as well as well as the same answer in response to the question in the Q&A of 'is the cash sufficient to get us to cash flow break even?' ... five months later an equity raise.
So should I be selling up ?