Ben Richardson, CEO at SulNOx, confident they can cost-effectively decarbonise commercial shipping. 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.
No worries. Keep on the lookout for Bruno I/vs as normally likes to give them on news and sure he will be keen on explaining rationale and give more details of progress.
Thanks for your informative post. One thing for sure investors who have bought over 3 pence will hold. I came in around 3p it's my intention to see it through with animal health risk and investing go hand in glove
17You could be right and I have long thought the review would lead to a hive off the human side to concentrate on AH due to the background of the BOD. A couple of things which BJ said in the I/v just convinced me a bit more. The using of the money to concentrate on the US Vamoose sales when the marke has recovered to be the best possible valuation when I think they would have spent more in UK if they tended to keep Vamoose. The specific mention of the AH pipeline and the specific references to chicken mite and the reference to main US poultry Company's doing trials and knowing the oligopolistic nature of the industry means you can really build that side with a small team and a few strategic alliances. The mention of the industry and consumer sentiment was a big driver and BJs previous experience would put him in a great position to exploit this to the full. Only my thoughts as usual It was clear to me that the strategic review would seek to sell off the human side and concentrate resources on the AH side.Tge main issue was could they do a deal and at what price. To me they have succeeded really well in both areas and as someone who has spent a lot of his working live involved in selling and marketing ectoparasiticides in all species and have worked with some of the BOD in a previous life I fully realise that the approach chosen to move Tyru/TYR forward is the right one. GLA
If tyratech carry on as they are they will fold. Sell vamousse and stay in business. Remember tyratech delivered in human health if they do the same in animal health we all be quids in. The animal health sector is far bigger than human health $$$$$$$
Absolutely agree. The company is doing what they said they would earlier in the year � this should be reassuring?! Thanks to all for comments.
We have to accept the sale of vamousse if we don't tyratech will fold. Accept and stay in business or reject and go under. It's a one brainer
Not really. The capital invested by you and I is insignificant(I presume! :)) in terms of capital they need to develop new products and get them to market. The theory of the buyback is that by reducing the number of shares it raises the value of remaining shares, which makes the company a more attractive investment for new large investors and keeps existing IIs happy, too.
Thanks for your comment. Presumably, by the same token, if people chose not to sell their shares then that would leave Tyratech with quite a considerable amount of capital to use to grow the company. Is that not perhaps a better way to go for all of us?
Link to the RNS below. A lot of people haven't seen it? http://www.tyratech.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/RNS_120417.pdf
With the sale of Vamousse for $13M the company is offering to buy back shares at 3p each with up to $8.5M of the proceeds. The remainder $4.5M is used to settle fees, maintain covenants and ensure the survival of the company. However, for every share that is not bought back under the Tender Offer. Post Sale & Post Tender - The company will hold :- Cash equivalent @3p per share! All the other current Retail product ranges (eg Guardian, OutSmart) All the other products under Trial (eg PureScience Poultry) All the other products under development (eg PureScience Swine) All the IP patents Granted and Pending (36, 32 respectively) A possible $4.5M extra payment from Alliance Pharma for continued market success of Vamousse And possible payments from the licensed IP developments. And a new focus of taking a large chunk of the $6 Billion AH sector. And all this for a current SP of 2.5p Exciting times GLA, NIA, DYOR, & ATJ
according to Interactive Investor site the human lice part of the company has been sold to Alliance Pharma for $13 million hence the rise in SP!
Buying back shares means the company has to pay. it is therefore sufficiently solvent to be able to do it. It is not a case of raising money quite the reverse. Some of you people need to read a treatise on stock market.
That is the theory but does not always work!
What we need are new contracts in AH otherwise tyru will simply go under
If shares are bought back by Tyratech does this mean the remaining shares will be worth more by virtue of there being less on the market?
I suppose the issue is that the animal health market is worth $7billion as opposed to the human health worth $0.8 billion. Why would the company want to spend $8.5 million buying back shares? Any ideas? Also why are people selling their shares now for just over 2p when they can get 3p for their share from the company? Can anyone enlighten me? Many thanks.
Totally disagree.It is a great deal allowing them to concentrate on AH which is their strength and huge potential market. They can�t do both which was the whole point ifvthe srategic review. The SP was 1.75 abdvtgst is the reality whatever your average.So we have a choice Vote yes and get 2.85 or hold for longe term or vote NO and you will get a dilutive raise. The way the SH holdings are I think the BOD will get this passed easily enough but we each have to decide for ourselves
I'd say it's pretty bad. They are basically having to sell part of the company and saying that they will need to borrow more money or go under. As someone who bought this at 14p I'm definitely not selling, but I may regret it if it goes under...
What do people make of the RNS? Looks like the company are very confident of success in the animal health industry. Would be grateful for any insights/opinions. Thanks.
Luke probably give a much better e plantation of difference. Even though I have done my Wien form it was just much easier to trade Tyru unless you already had Tyr shares but don�t fully understand the difference but feel they must be roughly correlated in SP. Again not sure if release of RNS s on TYR is for any particular reason. In fact you think they woukd out out any RNS on both platforms as the cost cannot be that much given how few they generally release. As I said I am happy with current situation as gives you the chance to trade Tyru if a very good/very bad RNS happens and you pick it up qypyickly
Hi Ivy I see your point. Presumably RNSs are released under TYR for the benefit of the IIs. So it gives us an advantage, added to which there seem to be around 60% fewer shares issued in TYRU? Are we right in assuming a big rise in TYR would result in a correspondingly bigger rise in TYRU? I remember a discussion a while back with Luke about relative benefits of each.
Hi los Likewise but you can see from the dramatic rise on TYM that the significance of the RNS was not fully appreciated until a day later so if we get big news here then we may have a chance to digest it ahead of other investors
I subscribe to the Investor Alert service on tyratech.com. That way you get the news in your mailbox as soon as released. With only just over 40% of shares in free flotation, they could dry up quite quickly with good news.
Very large trades look like all buys to presumably mop up all the sold stock so this will rise quickly on news. Are these trades a sign of incoming news so be on the lookout early next week. As it comes on TYR any big news on the strategic review could give an opportunity to existing SH to buy more if they want to before a wider audience becomes aware. So watch and wait.
Let's keep hoping some good news before xmas would be wonderful ☺