Member Info for 21ATS

IMO and already covered here. This is all about madia pressure and saving face and has little to do with anything contractual.

Had there been no link to Baroness Mone, none of this would be even newsworthy nevermind reaching a point of litigation.

Snouts in the trough has never changed and never will., no matter what political persuasion you are. This is just the latest case to be brought because it fills column inches and takes the heat off whatever today's bad political decision/news is.

Call me a Cynic.....

The Medpro situation is the current high profile newspaper chasing case.

The Michelle Mone situation has brought this one to prominence.

Tomorrow's Fish & Chip wrappers.

Question:-

What specific component makes these tests pro use only? Is it sourcing an appropriate sample substance to test?

Genuinely curious. It looks pretty much the same as a covid lft.

Question:

Are there different approval requirements that need to be met to allow a company to market (tests, LTF's etc) direct to end users rather than via the NHS/professionals? Using the Amazon suggestion as an outlet.....

Whilst I agree there seems to be little interest in Covid products on a commercial basis.

There is undoubtedly upside in the case vs the DHSC that these products are continually being verified.

Same Times journalist (Alex Ralph) the trotted out the previous article about the DHSC dispute that was somewhat less than positive and light on facts.

This time he appears to be taking a different perspective.

Scatter gun journalism.

GIven the lack of substance/communication a move in any direction has been based on thin air for some time.

Why be careful? As though anything any of us write on here has any effect on the company or it's SP in any way shape or form.

As unpalatable as it may seem, the suggestion of asset strip and takeover is as realitic an option as many of the other fantasies posted on this board.

Right now this just feels like death by a thousand cuts. I've never encountered such a level of ambivalence by a BOD in any company I've ever invested in.

The oddity of this whole thing is the cash pile they're sitting on, it's like watching a massive Euromillions lottery winner sat staring at a massive pile of cash not sure what to do with it as they've never actually been in that position before.

Get some financial advice! (ie A decent CEO with some sort of real world plan).

Question then re M&A. As that seems to be the way this thread has evolved and a reasonable number of people seem to consider it the way out of the current stasis.

Is it normal that a company would pass all due dilligence (the company buying or the company selling) when there is a dispute/pending court case in progress, the outcome of which is absolute on the company still remaining in business?

Can due dilligence even take place whilst a dispute/pending court case is in place and the particulars of that case are ringfenced by a non disclosure agreement?

Thoughts please on both the above points.

Personally I feel that it's irrelevant that the cash isn't ringfenced, I feel there are real legal barriers stopping any potential M&A hence the questions above.

So if anyone has a semblance of factual knowledge in this area I'm all ears. Genuinely, I'm all ears as I just feel like we're stumbling around in the dark here throwing out conjecture and opinion as though it were fact.

I'd be interested if the company even responded to a letter from PI100.

None of us have any real grasp of what this dispute is about, the nitty gritty, the details. What exactly is being alledged. None of us. Yet it seems fair game to post newspaper articles about it depsite there being a non disclosure agreement.

Despite claims of "strong grounds" to enforce it's contract by NCYT, here we are still.

"The market" seems to think the longer this drags on, the less a favourable outcome looks likely. It's not a suprise really considering the near absolute silence about the herd of elephants circulating around the room.

A bad outcome the business is trading insolvent, a good outcome the sky's the limit. The mcap currently sits about halfway between those two outcomes. Half the cash position with a value of zero for anything else, stock, IP...anything.

Absolutely nothing else matters now until this dispute is tidied up, nothing. It casts a shadow so large over the entire business that NCYT can do nothing other than tread water until the dispute is settled.

There's a difference between deramping and being a dissillusioned holder fed up with the apparent rudderless ship this company appears to have become, now even more so that the current Captain has walked the plank.

It's the eternal/fanatical optimists I find more irritating.

I'll be more optimistic when I see some decent contracts/sales, some direction, a resolution or at least apparent movement towards a resolution of the DHSC dispute. Some signs of professional marketing, in fact some signs of professionalism full stop.

What a mistake it was on my part investing here, but at so far down there's little point selling what's left. It may as well stay invested for the end game, whatever that may be. Fortunately I didn't invest more than I could afford to lose, that still doesn't stop it stinging though.

This will be my last venture onto AIM. It'll be sensible boring stuff from now on.

I keep reading a comment/comments on here that the market/BOD "what Private Investors out".

Why? and on what grounds do you believe this is really a goal of said market/BOD?

What is the logic behind this statement?

This is a genuine question BTW aimed at understanding who gains from this scenario and in what way?

I think they will have had supply chains in place with approved product. That would hve been 6 months or so in advance of requirement, it simply how institutions of this nature operate.

The NCYT product wouldn't even have been on the radar until approval, now it's approved they can order and we can supply assuming we have stock.

I think we've missed the boat for this winter.

I'd be delighted to be wrong, sadly I don't think I am.

It's the 27th October today. If healthcare institutions are buying product for this winter at this time of year they haven't been doing their job properly. They should already be contracted, delivered and in stock.

I fear the CTDA approval is to late for this winter. Lets hope they get it on the list for winter 2023.

Whilst you're absolutely correct that the test itself is multi respiratory, you have to admit the company is not doing itself any favours by headlining the RNS

"UK Approval of genesig® SARS-CoV-2 Winterplex® 3G"

It reads like a covid test that also does some other things. So unless you're really interested in the detail of this company, a quick scan of the RNS and most people will be thinking "Oh they've got another covid test approved, covid isn't a thing any more"

I just see the can continually being kicked down the road until ncyt are somehow forced to address it.

There seems to be very little in the way of conviction in anything associated with this company. I'm struggling to remember any company in which I've had money invested that appears to be so completely ambivalent.

It would now be an appropriate time for the company to issue an RNS pointing out the important omissions in the Times article with regard to CTDA approval. Therefore not commenting directly on the dispute, but making the full facts clearer.

I test positive for covid on Saturday, first time I've had it, I'm triple jabbed.

Really ill for about 18 hours but now just feels like a cold.

The reality is no one really cares any more, isolate for 5 days then carry on as normal.......even if you still test positive just carry on.

Forget covid revenue in any way, shape or form.

Even if something monumental occurred and covid surged massively again. Do you really think they'll be sourcing products from a company with which they have an ongoing dispute. A company that for all direction it appears to be getting at the moment may as well be run by any of the clueless aspiring wannabes for Alan Sugars "the apprentice".

What a shambles. What a golden opportunity being squandered.

It's obvious isn't it?

Waiting for the DHSC case to resolve, however long that may take.

I've written this off now at full value, the money is lost aready in my mind, I'm just letting it sit there and in years to come whatever happens, happens.

If however, Novacyt had to pay the full value of the claim in the period up to and including September 2023, then the Group would not have sufficient funds to settle the liability without agreeing a payment plan or raising additional cash. As a result of this, a material uncertainty exists that may cast significant doubt on the Group's ability as a going concern.
__________________________________________________________________________________________

The above statement sums up how "the market" currently views NCYT.

Effectively everything the company is doing going forward is irrelevant until the DHSC situation is resolved as with an adverse judgement the company could effectively be trading insolvent.

It explains the current mcap and highlights the binary nature of being a shareholder here now.