Member Info for 21ATS

No not a deramp, not a prediction.

With 71m shares in issue, a share price of £1.43 equates to an mcap of £101m.......or equal to the cash in the bank.

Roll up roll up and buy a free company at £1.43.

I'm not sure I've ever encountered this in a healthy profit making company before.

That's simply because future growth/profits is currnetly an unknown. You can't price in or reflect what you don't know. (Risking a Donald Rumsfeld moment here).

This is now a bottom drawer share (if you're underwater like many of us are). Do your mental health some good, tuck them away and check in every so often expecting to hear nothing in the way of news other than standard periodic updates.

Anything other than that is a nice bonus.

This could be a two year turnaround at minimum.

21ATS, it's in the RNS last year. If the dispute was about how the contract was awarded, why make a £20m replacement warranty in the accounts.
__________________________________________________________________________

Good accounting practice, making an allowance in the correct tax year for one of the possible outcomes.

Your assumption is the DHSC are actually in charge of the timelines and decisions, I don't think they are I feel a "Higher force" has put everything on hold temporarily. I think we'll find out more mid summer. I'd be surprised if anything with the DHSC dispute is settled or even discussed before that.

I hope I'm wrong.

The current consensus I believe is that the dispute is due to inefficient products and processes. The GLP is all about the unfair awarding of contracts.
_________________________________________________________________________________

Where do we get this information?

My understanding is we've really been told nothing of detail other than there's a dispute.

A judicial review would likely trump arbitration or negotiation of arbitration.

Being the govenrment they can use "public interest" to postpone arbitration as the outcome of a JR would be relevant to the arbitration.

Legal action then could be halted on the grounds that that outcome of the JR it pertinent to the dispute.

It really is the only thing that seems to make any sense, otherwise why no Legal action?

The only other possibility is an off the record sugeestion that no framework approvals would be forthcoming if any legal action was started.

Anyone else have a better explanation?

There will likely be an anti-litigation clause within the dispute framework.

Do you not find it strange the number of companies drawn into this dispute without a single hint of legal proceedings?

I now have no doubt that the entire dispute (for all companies) is being bundled up and stalled awaiting the results of the GLP judicial Review due in May if it's not delayed again.

IMO no news due on the dispute until June 22 at the earliest.

I have a feeling many people have been obsessed with what's happening in the UK and UK approvals. What we're selling to the DHSC and what we're selling within the framework agreement. What the UK gov is deciding is happening or not happening.

I have a feeling though the moment the DHSC dispute and forward order cancellations dropped that NCYT made a conscious shift to deal with non UK customers.

What I really don't understand is the complete lack of market updates.

I guess we'll know more at the end of this week (hopefully).

Clearly a glitch in the matrix. Normal service will be resumed shortly.

Paranoia is really starting to set in on this board.

In less than two weeks we'll have a better grasp of where we are. Then it's time to make a decision. Hold or Sell.

Anything before that is pure speculation.

I was listening to the outcome of this on the radio earlier and I'm sturggling to understand of there's anything occuring as a result of this review?

Im assuming there was no disputed payment as there is with NCYT and others. So what? They shouldn't have done it, don't do it again, carry on nothing to see here.

Lets say the Gov/DHSC placed a huge order with NCYT for PCR tests.

Would you trust them to pay? It certainly wouldn't be money up front.

Right now I'd be very nervous and I'd want a conversation about the outstanding situation.

Hopefully we find out when it all comes out in the wash after May this year.

My concern is it just lingers and festers and the judicial Review continues to get postponed.

“It’s just baffling that you would put so much effort into UK manufacturing and then turn round and say we don’t want to purchase.”

She added: “It seemed to get caught up with the Good Law Project.”
_____________________________________________________________________

This is the pertinent part people. Are we starting to understand what's going on here. The GLP have infact fanned the flames to a degree that the Gov were simply unable to continue on thier chosen path for fear of litigation, feet in mouths, pie in face etc.

Rather than award any contracts to any UK companies on the offchance a minister drank in one of their distant relatives pubs (and could therefore be banded across the press being accues of cronyism) they simply stopped the whole lot. Gee thanks GLP, great move.

The GLP are not the Robin Hood figures they would like to portray themselves as.

I was thinking about the TATA link over Christmas, there was lots of excitement about NCYT machines being in play but little in the way of knowing exactly who is supplying the consumables.

It strikes me that this business is not dissimilar to inkjet printers. It's all good selling the machines, but it's the consumables where the real money is.

If this country means anything at all, justice needs to be seen to be done.
____________________________________________________________

Exactly, now it's starting to sink in. It's about being seen justice to be done, being seen to do the right thing, being seen to be transparent, being seen via a judicail review that no one has acted inappropriately.

Until all that occurs, all disputes are on hold, any legal action taken against the DHSC before all the public reviews have taken place will be blocked with extreme prejudice.

There is a solution to the DHSC dispute and we dont need to wait for this damn GLP .

Novacyt needs to send their top sales negotiating team and make contact with DHSC representatives , tell them lets make a deal now , you need PCR / LFT urgently , well , we can supply you x amount right now , just give us up front the money . Lets shake on a £100M - 500M contract right now and all is forgiven .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I really don't think you grasp the problem here.

Fear is the issue, Fear that retrospectively any member of the gov that authorises procurement (or is in any way associated with procurement) from a UK business who's 6th cousen once walked the dog of the cleaner of one of the sales reps in said business is going to get splashed over the red tops and dragged through another review by the GLP.

Fear that their job will go and the golden parachute executive position once they've run their term in the commons.

The real money isn't in Gov, it's after Gov, but you need as clean a sheet as possible and retain links to get those golden eggs.

This has lead to decisions to procure from companies that are so far removed from any association that the product itself becomes a secondary consideration.

This isn't about bungs or brown envelops, it's about being seen to be transparent to a degree that is almost destructive.

Been saying this for a while. The GLP have meddled to a degree that the government have no alternative than to buy elsewhere.

This is the reason the DHSC dispute is going to continue until all associated cases have run their course.

May 22 at present if it isn't delayed again.

It’s not whining, it’s just an expectation for the board to engage with the market and shareholders. The performance this year has completely crashed a lot of sh’s value in this company and it’d be rather nice to understand why.
___________________________________________________________

The board are legally obliged to report market sensitive information. You therefore have to assume there is none.

The alternative is the BOD are choosing to not comply with company law - which I simply don't believe.

Why do you expect a change in MO from the BOD? What has changed here since you all started demanding an RNS on an almost daily basis?

This is a long term play as a shareholder. I said months ago that the next material release would be year end results in January and I was vilified.

Nothing will change here unless there us an unexpected resolution to the DHSC debacle.

Hold and believe in the fundamentals or sell up and look elsewhere. There really is no third option.

Frankly I agree, the GLP to me look like a load of meddling do gooders who appear to be doing more harm than good with some sort of misplaced public interest litigation.

I think the Gov completely get this and are using it to postpone/delay having to deal with the multiple DHSC disputes by simply kicking the can further down the road (the judicial review that is).