focusIR May 2024 Investor Webinar: Blue Whale, Kavango, Taseko Mines & CQS Natural Resources. Catch up with the webinar here.
KJM is spot on, it's half price ( 9.97 )on their website as well.
https://www.hollandandbarrett.com/shop/product/provexis-fruitflow-omega-3-capsules-60018340
BB
Old news CB
See http://www.ii.co.uk/discussion/t/provexis/1142546/41?u=boring_bernie
Presumably the web site is wrong, about the AGM, which is poor, but the chances are the AGM will take place in October after the legally required 21 days notice is given.
BB
Alf
Yea, I get your point
It was updating on articles from a few years ago such as http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-24607698, so it shouldn't have come as a surprise to any holder or anyone who'd done some decent research.
Plainly GPBack sees it as a negative, each to their own.
Personally I see it as a positive, all be it one with caveats attached to it ( cost and knowledge mainly ).
Some people will read the article and come to the conclusion they need to do next to nothing in terms of primary prevention, but they're not our / DSM's target market. The main target market is still the worried well. In time, if more BP trials are carried out, that might change, but, for the moment our market is the health conscious part of the world's population with a decent disposable income.
BB
This isn't new news.
For the last couple of years the official guidelines in the States is now not to recommend aspirin for primary prevention unless the patient's risk factors for CVD are higher than average. Rather than that meaning Fruitflow has no market, it's been seen as an opportunity by DSM to sell Fruitflow as a safe alternative to people who might have in the past, taken aspirin.
Plainly the cost of Fruitflow and a lack of knowledge of it's existence among the public restrict the market for FF, but to say the study referred to might destroy the business case for Fruitflow and Provexis is a bit odd.
BB
Now now Pukkers, your challenges of anything overly positive are normally better than that !
I don't think direct sales of FF+ were as good as they'd expected, but , given the info to hand, it's not true to say "Only logical assumption is they have a large inventory of unsold goods.".
Inventories just under 12 months ago ( which is the latest info we have ) were 22k. At roughly £5 box cost to us ( you can calculate this from the accounts ), that means there were roughly 4500 boxes left just under twelve months.
So, yea, it was likely more than they'd anticipated holding, but it's not unduly large, and all that stock from 12 months ago is likely sold now.
BB
Farmgal
Re "BB, you speak to IF from time to time, I assume you've known for perhaps as long as me..."
I've not spoken to him for a while. The last couple of times I've communicated with him was by email, when he replied at some godforsaken time, so I kind of assumed he was spending some time in a very different time zone, which, given his accent I presumed would be that part of the world.
If what you say is accurate ( rather than dot joining ! ) then he should complete the relevant form for Companies House so his country of residence shows up as Australia.
I'm no expert in company regs, but given I think you're supposed to inform them of a change in a director's residential address within 14 days, I'll let you tell him that next time you speak to him !
BB
CB
Not that it really matters where he lives, but if you really feel strongly about it, you could always drop Ford an email and ask him if the information recorded at Companies House about his residency address is accurate ( it shows him as being UK resident ).
To be honest though, this is just Farmgal beng mischievous in a "me knows" kind of way !
BB
Gixer
Profit, rather than revenue, will be a better measure of what the IP's currently worth, and what it may be worth in the future. When the Alliance Agreement was signed, DSM effectively took out a twelve year lease on our IP, of which there's roughly four years left ( I'm assuming, but don't know for sure, it was for exactly twelve years so would expire in June 2022 )
We should really wait for the results to come out to see what our share of the profit was for the last FY, but where's the fun in that, so if you assume it's roughly 200k, then why on earth would DSM spend millions on the IP now when they have an agreement in place which values the IP on a profit share basis ?
The only reason I typed anything on this subject is because one or two holders like the idea of us selling the IP now rather than issuing new shares to keep us going. Unless the board are actively looking to sell the FF IP on to a third party ( in which case they should inform the market ), then basically I'm saying be careful what you ask for because you might not like the result. ( Wellsite's post is spot on btw ).
Wind forward a few years to when the AA expires and we should be in a much better position to either renegogiate the terms or just renew ( that assumes that FF sales still grow ). The downside of that for some holders is it would mean that the board members continued to get paid excessively for what they do. When you look at their renumeration in comparison to other AIM companies, it's not excessive, but when you take into account that they're pretty much running a shell, then it certainly looks excessive. That's not likely to change, so you either live with it, moan about it on a regular basis or sell up.
BB
Gixer
Why ?
DSM are making money without owning the IP. The only reason they're sharing the profits is because we own the IP. To take us out if the equation they would need to pay us what could be considered a sensible value for the IP, which basically would have to reflect what they're currently paying us as part of the AA, and what the forecasts for that are over ( say ) the next two to four years.
To put a value on the IP you need to demonstrate a way to monetise it. Within the confines of the AA, that's basically what I've done based on the info to hand.
As time goes on and sales ( and therefore profits ) hopefully increase, then the value of the IP will increase ( hence why I think it's a good idea to get more funds ).
But DSM don't really care what our market cap is, they also don't really care how much it's cost to develop Fruitflow over the years. They mostly care about it being profitable for them, so, at this moment in time, they're very unlikely to throw 10million+ our way for the IP - because it just wouldn't make any financial sense to do so.
If someone else showed an interest in buying the IP then that would change things, but there's not a sniff of that, and likely won't be until closer to the end of the AA ( 2022 if memory serves me right ? )
Feel free to put a reasoned argument forward for DSM buying the IP for what it might be worth in five to ten years time, but they're not a charity and lack of cashflow can kill companies, so why would they bend over backwards to help out a few small shareholders in PXS ? They're delivering what they're contracted to do under the AA, and they've also helped out with FF+, so they likely feel they're squeaky clean.
BB
CB
Re "We were supposed to break even at Ca 20/30 products."
Nope, that was never the case. What happened was that some people on bulletin boards took a quote from someone ( Moon if I remember rightly ? ) and, accidentally or on purpose, twisted it to suit their own ( overly positive ) agenda.
Moon was partly resposible for this because he's not stupid and knew what he said would be twisted.
What was actually said was that DSM would reach critical mass with 20 to 30 products. All that means is, at it's simplest level, Fruitflow would be profitable for them and, as the number of companies buying Fruitflow increased, then they'd be more profitable.
Roughly speaking, that's turned out to be true because they're sharing those profits with us.
Maybe Moon was guilty of over-egging that statement ( I'm pretty sure he was ), but if people are stupid enough to believe what was subsequently misquoted and/ or misinterpreted, then it merely shows that the market is a cruel place and is very adept at taking money off the naive.
If you ( and many others ) have only recently learnt that lesson, then that's unfortunate, but bleating on about the unfairness of it all won't help, and will probably just give you ulcers ! Learn from the experience, and you stand a better chance of making a few quid on the markets here and there.
Fruitflow is making money for DSM, so will doubtless survive and grow.
It's also making a contribution to Provexis. Not enough to cover the company's costs, but it still has some value.
You probably feel like you've been shafted, but, in reality, you put money in a high risk business which hasn't ( at least so far ), delivered, which is something which happens all the time.
If you'd wanted less risk, there were 100's of other companies to choose from. The fact that Buck and Ford have made money over the years while you've lost some is just a lesson to be learnt in that accountants and gobby chief execs almost always come off all right !
BB
CB
Re "they don't deserve to raise any funds so they need to sell the IP and go away."
That's a possibility, but you're posting that from an emotional viewpoint.
For the last full FY, income from DSM on the progit share was roughly 150k.
For H1 this FY, income from DSM on the profit share barely moved from the previous year, so the profit share for the full year could, waving a wet finger in the air, be between 150 and 200k.
So, at the moment what's the IP worth to someone ( probably DSM ) ?
Take your pick on metrics. On 3 or 4 times revenue, you're talking 460 to 800k
On 10 to 20 times profit, you're talking 1.5 to 4 million.
Any valuation, which isn't based on a fire sale scenario, is likely to be more profit based than revenue based. DSM wouldn't need Ford and Buck, so you'd immediately strip out over 150k from the business. They also wouldn't need the bits and pieces which go with maintaining an AIM listing, so that's another 50k or so saved.
But, at the moment, Provexis pay the patent costs, which I'd guess would be betwenn 50 and 100k, which would reduce their profit so would likely reduce the current worth of the IP, so maybe it's only worth circa 2 million at the moment ?
I'm assuming that they'd take the hit on what our current R&D budget is.
Current market cap is approx 8 million, so I'd rather they raise more cash and then we'd hopefully see an increase in our profit share to something closer to justify the current market cap ( patent costs will likely be roughly fixed per annum )
I don't think FF+ is worth much. End of the day it has no usp and could be replaced by pretty much anyone who could buy in a bit of consultancy from the likes of O'Kennedy and Duttaroy if they wanted to.
But heh, if you want the company to issue an RNS saying they can't sign the accounts of as a going concern and they're "exploring all avenues etc etc but may end only being able to return a % of the current market cap to shareholders" then be my guest.
In those circumstances it's quite possible there'd be an EGM asking shareholders to approve the sale of the IP ( probably at below market cap ). If it wasn't approved then you'd be saying hello to administration.
So, if you want to see them fail to raise more funds, then bully for you. Personally I'd rather see more funds raised and take another dilution
*posted in the dark, on a tablet, so this will likely be full of typos
BB
Havn't a clue to be honest Farmgal.
At 20 million'ish, that's approx 1% of the shares in issue, but whether it was a PI or something related to Darwin, I suspect we'll never know.
Can't be long now till we get some info from the company.Until then I'm assuming they're busily trying to raise funds so the accounts can be signed off with a tick in the box for "going concern".
Plainly ( opinion not necessarily factual ), we're goosed if they can't raise more funds, but I'm 90% confident that more money will be raised and the ball will keep rolling for at least another year
BB
CB
You've not read the RNS properly, or you've dreamt it.
Presumably the one you're talking about is http://otp.investis.com/clients/uk/provexis_plc/rns/regulatory-story.aspx?cid=1569&newsid=962162
That states that ~41 million options were due to expire in August 2018, and 10 million of those were Ford's
Both Buck and Ford were issued another 10 million options , but the exercise price for those is 0.55p, can't be exercised till April 2020 and they expire in 2027, so you've probably read something, fumed, and then convinced yourself of something which isn't the case.
As for the other options, well most of them are exercisable at prices well north of where the sp currently sits, so, at the moment, the people who have been granted those options are sat on pieces of paper which are worth absolutely nothing.
Plainly in your crazy mixed up world, it would be a bad thing for the sp to rise to a level where the options are actually worth anything, so your bitterness is explainable.
Heh, you put money in something in the hope of making a quick multiple of your investment and it didn't come off.
That's tough, but presumably you knew that losing money was a possibility, and presumably you also knew that people who were taking a salary from the company were pretty much the only people involved in this risk free ?
Are Ford and Buck overpaid for what they're doing ?
Yea, I think they are.
Are their options something to worry, and fume about ?
No, not at all. If the sp rises then we'll all be better off, and will have the opportunity to take some profits or reduce losses depending on your buying price.
BB
CB
The options weren't nil-paid, so the option price would have to be paid, which means the sp would have to be above that level to make any profit to make exercising their options to make it worth their while. The options were EMI ones so I'm not sure what the tax liability there'd be on them ( if any ).
Basically any holder who is glad the sp is way south of 0.6p is cutting their nose off to spite their face and allowing bitterness to cloud their judgement.
Oh, they didn't lapse today by the way, they actually lapsed last weekend.
Also, chances are, they'll soon have another set of options issued at a lower price than those which have recently expired, which will give you something else to pointlessly fume about !
Oh, and I don't think Buck had any options expiring this month, and Ford had 10 million which have just expired, rather than 20 million, but, apart from that, yea spot on !
Nowt so queer as folk though :)
BB
Their turnover is in the order of 400 to 500 million per annum.
I don't know how many products they have in store or online, but if it was 500 then that'd be an average of a million per product. At £20 / box, you'd be talking 50,000 boxes, so I'd say up to 10k boxes per annum as something to aim at in year one is pretty sensible.
BB
Alf
The 5 million trade is delayed from yesterday, so, from the time of the trade and looking at the trades around it, it's actually possible it was a sell. To be fair, if I had to bet on it, I'd have it down as a buy though.
The 2,955,767 trade however, was slightly delayed and could only have been a buy
BB
Looking back through the old "paperwork", I believe those options expire on the 26th.
BB
Re "NPFT stands for a Non Price Forming Transaction - if anyone knows what that is ????"
It's from an Asian website, but I reckon the explanation still stands for the UK
From http://www.asifma.org/uploadedFiles/Research/171009_Linklaters_TR_MiFID%20II_Trading%20Obligations.pdf
***
Non- Price forming – A list of 9 types of transaction that are
non-price forming are specified in RTS 1 Art.2:
(a) the transaction is executed by reference to a price that is calculated over multiple time instances according to a given benchmark;
(b) the transaction is part of a portfolio trade;
(c) the transaction is contingent on the purchase, sale, creation or redemption of a derivative contract or other financial instrument where all the components of the trade are to be executed only as a single lot;
(d) the transaction is executed by a UCITS management company or an alternative investment fund manager which transfers the beneficial ownership of shares from one collective investment undertaking to another and where no investment firm is a party to the transaction;
(e) the transaction is a give-up transaction or a give-in transaction;
(f) the purpose of the transaction is to transfer shares as collateral in
bilateral transactions or in the context of central counterparty (CCP)
payments;
(g) the transaction results in the delivery of shares in the context of
the exercise of convertible bonds, options, covered warrants or other
similar derivatives;
(h) the transaction is a securities financing transaction;
(i) the transaction is carried out under the rules or procedures of a
trading venue, a CCP or a central securities depository to effect a
buy-in of unsettled transactions.
Take your pick really, but, in terms of likelihood I'd rank the top three as :-
g - Bond conversion
d- Transfer from one fund manager to another or
c - Derivative trade of some type
BB - I'm pretty clueless really
The negotiations for off takes for Brazil and Europe were mentioned in the last quarterly update at the beginning of July
"Active engagement on multiple commercial discussions for new supply agreements in Brazil and Europe"
In the same update, talking about Stage 2 financing, the company said "The Company is on track to achieve financial close in 2018.", so within four months, which, in the grand scheme of things, is pretty close.
I think Ed Brown's job is pretty safe. Price-sensitive information can't be leaked if it's already in an RNS !
BB
Alf
Re "Who in there right mind ... "
Veggies might buy from Swanson rather than buying FF+, though, to be honest, they'd likely be better off ( financially at least ) buying Circulease
BB