Member Info for bobbyaxelrod

I've only started following the company and I've been in and out of an investment earlier this year, but continued to watch the company.

One thing I found interesting when first reading about OXIT is that they sold their quantum computing business, amidst a quantum bull market with excessive stock exchange valuations, for not very much. Sure they maybe only deal with a anciliary part of quantum computing but I believe it could have attracted a high valuation in future, and will likely be listed by the acquirers after several more years of continuing losses.

On reading the annual report, I found interesting that the CEO's bonuses incentives are releated to maximising ROCE, EPS, etc over a period of 3-5 years (standard), but, point being, it made me think of how technology companies can often be better are served by unconstrained and (sometimes) longer-term thinking founder-leaders.

I still like the company but today's result is worrying for the near-term, in terms of falling orders, tariff uncertainty, US buyer uncertainty, tariffs, etc. But the company, while they may being trying to allay some anxiety for investors in the know, actually inadvertently make me think of the fact that OXIG) - while technologically advanced - is not a software company, but relies on actual inputs, i.e. rare earths. I believe this could become a real problem, or source of uncertainty. Furthermore, although I can't see this happening, there is always the chance of loss of Chinese demand either due to political reasons, stronger domestic competition, or an economic downturn.

Ultimately, I still believe that OXIT could be a good investment and will continue watching. The growth in their semiconductor sales is a very positive, and there is constant buyouts between semiconductors companies along the supply-chain. Would love to see a vision of OXIT that emphasises it as a technology, rather than an instruments company. Think the current price is good entry.

I first got interested in this group after looking at Amcomri Group, which, at the time, I decided not to invest in because I thought I'd get a better share price later in the year (it has since moved up quite considerably). I felt that Earnz had the potential to replicate Amcomri's strategy but less "legacy" assets to justify.

BBN, I play to reply properly when I've rewatched the IMC and have more time. I've only manage to rewatch the first half, but I'm struck by how despearte Martin is to stress how discount dragon is difficult and complex. I also - whilst appreciating the reason for the delay - don't fully buy this; the company raised money and made an announcement and should have been able to quickly establish operating from two sites wasn't possible and enact the move as per planned schedule.

HT2 and Stalin123, I agree on Martin being an expert salesman (necessary condition for any good listed CEO/Chairman) and it is highly valuable to have your longer term knowledge of him. For the most part, I find him well-meaning and genuine, and have encouraged by his stewardship. However, I am still completely baffled by his appointment at OPG Power (a company I'm reasonably familiar with).

Thought I'd quickly share this:

https://www.hl.co.uk/shares/stock-market-news/company--news/b-and-m-launches-turnaround-plan-after-weak-uk-sales-performance

B&M - a discount retailer - has really struggled this year. Discount Dragon hasn't gone backwards, and this may be a sign of strength given B&M's performance in the sector (although I will caveat this by saying there is plenty of reasons for why B&M is not comprable to DD).

Hi BBN - thanks for your valued input here. I haven't got around to rewatching the IMC presentation yet.

Re discussion of brands. I don't think this is that important because anyone can visit the 3 websites and see all the brands an offer. The key issues are bsaket margin, "operational profitability", and actual profitability.

On all the brands being operationally profitable in Sept. This is obviously great news. Maybe it is primarily driven by reduced marketing and customer acquisition spend - I assume this will pick up during Q4.

I need to review the presentation and see if they explicity stated current cash position. Then I can work out if their cash burn is reducing (incl. period from end of H1 to presentation date). If this is the case then this is also very positive.

Lots of catalysts: deal announcements with NC, new stock deal in Cannes for Boop, Cyber Monday, Black Friday, Christmas. A concern is Q4 is negatively affected by the move which sounds like it WILL finish DURING Q4.

Another concern is the lack of revenue growth in Q3 - which now being over - we can take as a given (i.e. no possibility of a suprise revenue beat). If this is more profitable then great, but a fast growing company should some top line growth over an entire quarter especially given the build up in stock breadth (caveat - no idea on stock depth) and irrespective of seasonal spending patterns (possibly).

Bumper Q4 is still on the cards but we won't know til next year.

Been thinking more about the institutional investor. They've invested on the basis of "growth" and the cash invested should be used for this purpose. Huddled are refocusing on profitability and cash conservation, but hopefully they will deploy this cash at right time in the right way to lead to a bumper Q4. If Huddled demonstrate continued growth then they will easily be able to raise more institutional capital. If they demonstrate minimal profitability (due to insufficient scale) then maybe they ultimately attract less investment.

Will aim to post something after rewatching IMC and if I have anything useful to say.

The science behind Verici's products is good. I think they have a publication in the Lancet. However, the recent conference abstracts do not point to the test becoming de riguer anytime soon. Instead, they are working to find specific use cases with transplant (e.g. BK virus) and hoping to show consistent utility in decision makin, e.g. around being able to modify immunosuppressants. It will take time to understand how and when to use the test. The jury is still out. Still bullish long term.

Re cash until H2 2026 - we will see. I'd imagine cash burn will increase at least from Q4 25 onwards to support investment in and costs of the sales team. I think we can conservatively assume at least 6 months, but maybe more. I also don't think the company will turn cash flow positive before this point.

Still optimistic, but think we need a greater idea of sales pipeline and sales cycle length (i.e. sales from X transplant centre increased at the following rate across the year and now account for Y% of sales).

We know they have cash for at least 6-9 months depending on cash burn.

They are reporting a the number of transplant centres being signed up as a leading indicator of future sales. But I have a feeling this will take longer to get real traction than expected as they are pursuing adoption at the clinician-level and will have to educate many clinicians and let me them test the product which takes time. However, being on a hospital protocol is a big deal and I think that has already happened with at least 1 centre.

There is also some naivety around the future of the product. "We are also confident, as adoption increases, testing centres will see that Tutivia can be used more comprehensively to replace a number of traditional biomarker tests." I am 99% certain that Tutivia won't "replace" any traditional tests but will become an additional test for a long period - maybe in the very long term, clinicians may decide they can drop certain tests but medicine is very conservative, rightfully so. If they were really confident in the product they should be thinking of a plan towards becoming a "standard of care" investigation, and to do this they need to start gathering data for a "real world evidence" trial as soon as possible (i.e. starting with the first sales and continuing). If they can demonstrate, not only its usefulness in decision making, but also it's COST SAVING then this is something that US insurers and healthcare providers will insist upon across ALL of their clinicians in one swoop.

Still bullish here long term but only if the company survives and can continue getting traction. Unless they show tangible performance that there is high likelihood the share price crashes from here towards the time of the next raise (6-9 months). If they can show any traction, the share price will almost definitely rise, and they will almost definitely raise more cash very soon/immediately after.

Is it just or is the Halfspace website terrible?

Sort of rings alarm bells for scam.

https://halfspacegroup.com/

I'm no longer invested here after selling out over past few weeks. I wasn't impressed by the interim results and really wonder about the dynamism of the leadership team driving the business. We have no idea of pipeline, deal prospects, contract negotiations - which makes me worry (we really need some leading indicators here). The investment case rests on California contract renewal and they have invested heavily in H1 but the economics of the overall contract (net of "investment" or just costs) remain uncertain.

H2 should show much better cash generation. What will they do with this cash? Probably re-invest in California/software development.

I'm still watching because I think the idea of a digital-enabled mental health service is a winner. However, I question how innovative the company is and I also believe the growth story may have been stalled for a while. Today's RNS is good news, but the contract size is tiny. They should have been able to build much more momentum by now, although, to be fair, the US political landscape is a real challenge for them.

Worried that Q4 will disappointed now because the move hasn't been completed. In general, the YoY story is intact, but the QoQ story has created uncertainty.

Potential catalysts: deal flow with NC, deal flow with Boop, continued QoQ and YoY growth, Q3 achieved "operational profitability" across all 3 brands, cash c1.5-2m (we don't know) sufficient to last until actual cash flow positivity, continued positive Trustpilot reviews, slow increases in Instagram following, refocus on profitability and basket margin and keeping customers returning. Everytime the share has reached the current level it has rebounded. I'm also adding at over 20% cheaper than the prices I sold at. I still think there is risk here and I think the upside has lessened (for now). Maybe the poor share price performance today will spark management to release more positive updates to the market to reassure investors.

I think the market reaction today speaks to uncertainty due to cash position, although I guess market participants will have checked the post-period information and realised they have more cash, and profitability. They really need more scale and higher revenues for this to work. Your 100% correct that stock mix is key, but the brands will have a challenge balancing offering a wide range of stock versus maintaining overall discount deal quality whilst minimising dead stock - this is all retailers, but for Huddled, due to the margins, it feels really tricky to navigate.

I'm no longer a strong holder and my position will be "managed" increasingly more as a trade. I plan to rewatch the investor presentation, but I personally found it lacking in detail and also citing improvements in certain metrics that have mystery, or not explicitly stated, comparables.

Fair enough. Much trepidation here still. What do you make of the market reaction here today?

In the Q&A they said Q3 lower revenue than Q2 due to concentration on basket margin and profitability. This is interesting given the large stock increases across all brands. I think they just had a bad Q3.

They increased stock breadth across all 3 brands and in some cases (e.g. Boop - it seems to have sold down). We can’t speak to stock depth. Perhaps they’ve been left with dead stock hence the emphasis on learning to get the “right” stock. However, in retailing there’s no guarantee that the “right” stock last quarter is right for the next quarter.

The move to Ingenuity seems to have stalled. Martin couldnt give guarantees, and he explained this by talking about the amount of stock to move, but he didn’t articulate the plan for dealing with this well. Surely a 2-3 month delays was avoidable because the need to move stock was foreseeable. There was chatter about “what we know is we can’t pick from two sites for the same customer”, so maybe this was their initial thinking.

Meanwhile, they are promising “big big deals” for NC and also for Boop, whilst casually mentioned the team are out in Cannes (are those Boop admin costs or head office costs? Probably a mix).

The story could still be intact, but I can’t bring myself to add to my investment today. I think management are purposeful in how they wrote the interim. They probably delayed the release in the hope Q3 would be something to shout about. There’s a lot of risk here and we would all benefit from BBN’s closer examination of these risks.

His post almost reads like an advert for THG Ingeuinity. He is generally a rose-tinted permabull, but that is dangerous in a stock like this (i.e. tiny market cap, governance issues, unprofitable, cash burn, unpredictable changes in strategy, with little backing up the balance sheet, etc). He should come back to engage in debate on here.

Sorry... balance sheet at present is pre-equity raise. So perhaps not as bad (still likely deteriorating). Still too early on a Monday for me!

Actually... no real surprise from NC performance. Q1 25 revenue 1.2m, Q2 25 1.3m. All the brands grew.

Q3 2025 total sales estimated at £4.9m (which is a decline on Q2 25). They guide for a reduction in H2 operating loss (so where is the cash going to come from?). They can only buy more stock with the proceeds from selling stock - if this is a loss-making exercise, then they will find it more challenging to grow sales because they increasingly less money to buy more stock.

Still expect >£20m revenue this year, but whether >£25m is possible seems unlikely - based on a Q4 blowout. Last year in Q4 they did approx 20% more in revenue in Q4 than Q3.

I can't be bothered yet to work out whether the purported improvements in basket margin are credible. Note this hard to even make sense of because the company use cost of sales (including much more) in the statements per brand, and basket margin is applied only after the cost of goods (i.e. the stock itself). The other costs involved in cost of sales involve estimations and guess work. This is the problem with a lot of the terms used in the statement, "oeprationally profitable before head office costs", "basket margin", "AOV"... to make sense of they require other information to be made explicit that isn't... it's almost like it's to mislead investors(!)

Real surprise from NC performance. Glad I reduced my investment here earlier but wish I’d sold more now (obviously). The main issue to me seems to be that the company will likely need to raise funds through equity or debt given the balance sheet deterioration. We don’t know how the balance sheet looks today. I think Boop Q3 revenue performance was likely good (given expanded product range and all the fragrances) but probably not profitable.

Operationally profitable by Sept still means cash burn. I think I’m wrong on the investment case here… maybe Martin’s new outfit OPG Power is better (joke)

Good week last week. Was announced in Time Magazine's listed of best AI companies (although there were 400 companies) but I think interest will continue to build ad there will be a rise into FDA approval. The FDA approval also leads to the release of BARDA funds and additional debt (with small amount of equity capital to raise to secure this debt), so I think there will be a rise on confirmation of clearance as well - but who knows.

No mention of the buyback. I reduced my investment considerably over the last few weeks. I like the company, and also the continuing dividend policy. But the communication, and lack thereof, around the buyback made me reconsider my allocation.

Hi both - still here but haven't had much useful to add, especially given radio silence from the company.

Boop's stock breadth has dropped significantly (over 1/3rd), Discount Dragon remained stable and Nutricircle had received a decent increase recently so maybe NC was getting a push.

I've become increasingly unwary about the investment, and much of this unwariness has come from monitoring website traffic and also the company's lack of communications, especially after a significant strategic shift. Add to this, ongoing concerns that I've voiced before re governance and I think the company faces a real make or break H2 2026.

The results release is slated for the end of the month, which to my paranoid eyes reads as negative, but suggests they want to have as much information as possible to share around how Q3 has progressed and Q4 is shaping up. This may suggest Q3 will be good, bolstered by the extra stock breadth that appears to have been sold down from Boop and also DD/NC. We will have to wait and see.

The other thing that has irked me is the previous, now unkept, promise of a tour of the new warehouse for shareholders. I don't think I would have attended, but the fact that this promise was not kept - and that it is in the company's power to do so, or at least provide follow up communications around this - has further eroded the mangement's credibility.

Without further financial results - and H1 25 is likely to not be profitable or even "operationally profitable" - showing strong growth and a path to profitability with reducing/no cash burn, I think I have had to read the tea leaves and be more sensible in my allocation. Accordingly over the previous couple of weeks I have reduced my investment by c30% and reinvested the funds elsewhere. I still think there's a good chance of positive share price action over the next 6 months but there's also considerable risk primarily related to governance and continued cash burn. It makes me wonder if all the previous high intensity communications were purposefully aimed at securing an institutional investor.

I'm not a holder here, but been watching on the sidelines for a while. Your points are valid. They have guided for continued growth in 2026 but with $25m dollars booked this year from Siemens it's hard to see how that's realistic unless they are expecting a massive ramp up in other areas of the business.

Yes, I think there will be a pop on FDA clearance news and a chance to take some profit (hopefully). There is a chance the FDA says no, or asks for further information related to manufacturing and supply-chain (I've seen this with a few other companies in recent years).

Once approval lands, Spectral immediately receive the remaining $6.5m of their debt finance provided they complete a small equity raise (I think around $7m. Add in the c$100m BARDA funding over several years, and they are well placed for commercialisation.

Meanwhile, real world evidence is accumulating https://www.stocktitan.net/news/MDAI/deep-view-system-highlighted-at-the-european-burns-association-nb7faybu7y72.html

And you are right to mention diabetic foot ulcer indication. I'm trying to value solely on burn indication to create a margin of safety against my own stupidity and an uncertain future, and still think it offers good value.

I've been continuing to build here, and may not be finished! It could all go wrong though obviously - risk/reward seems good for now.

I think the hurdle is a given and may already be priced in by the market - although we might still see a nice bounce on confirmation followed by excitement around commercialisation. Think commercialisation may disappoint (on profitability) because the company will prioritise adoption backed by extra debt and BARDA funding, and take several years before showing an attractive profile, but there should be chances to take decent profits during this journey.

Yes, that sounds like a nightmare. Just catching up on this chat board and can see that the SPAC deal did not work out so well for UK holders (as well as it should have done).

Re the spin-off. I don't know if we will hear much more now while the CEO has made his Finance, Focus, Finish policy (with Focus - on the FDA burn indication), but they have missed the deadline despite the spin-off receivng $1m in investment. I think Spectral AI's holding in the venture will be too low to matter. My cynical side views it as appeasement to Erich Spangenberg to keep him engaged with a veiled pay off.

While they have said that all Spectral IP will remain with Spectral, it is unclear exactly what the spin-off will achieve and the future relationship to Spectral. DeepView - as a "platform" - has a lot of potential to commericalise IP, and I'd rather Spectral stood to benefit rather than the spin-off. The Trump family is an investor in the IP spin-off, which probably bodes well.

The spin-off could be really valuable one day especially given Erich Spangenberg's background and backing, but it's difficult to understand exactly what is being "spun-off".