The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Harris..my play is on the big one..the decision.
What it does in between doesn't matter to me. ... It will be make or break for my holding
Can understand going for the trade though
Andy ..you must not take fakey too seriously.
He is just pump and dumping from his mums basement
It is not rubbish..my experience in years of dealing in shares.
When a share is fast moving the quote can get removed before your time limit..i suspect if what you say is true...and not ability to press button or powers stopping you as you originally said.i suspect then the share might have been dropping super quick....you probably could have sold at a lower price but chose not to
A lot different from a flatlined share where mms are desperate to trade
The increased cash is good.
The sales are not impressive. Remember 15 months with 'sole focus' and 'target market' of USA.
Hence net profit is only "expected"
The share has flatlined and will drift down again
i think some people are selling cos they might have bought in for a quick trade on the hope of a collapse of gov case after pre trial and or negotiation...or even just the jump from mid 40s
i can't imagine lth are going to sell after waiting for so long...
i know i considered selling to buy back in lower..but could not be ****d.
win or lose it will be transformational to so..so a 10% or so isn't go to be worth the effort
i think it will go to trial 100% now...but could easily be wrong.
Rubbish.
Occasionally happens with fast moving stock...not with flatlined
Really you don't understand my post?
I will try to make simpler for you.
5-0 said it was difficult to buy.so I tried and was offered .
So I don't think his comment was accurate l
I didn't buy.
Whilst I said there may be a trade at the share lowest pain ever..I certainly would not buy at this price.
Company barely making a profit and still have huge risk with gov dispute
Andy..i also did try a buy and was offered . Not sure on the validity of 5-0 comment
5-0 can you qualify how "we know there is a background buyer"??
There have been no tr1 s to advise of someone buying significant quantities?
Do you think a settlement or court?
1 vote for court
"Be under no illusion , the govt wanted the case stopped "
Well I did ask for clarification what you meant by this twice. With no answer . So you can't blame me if It sounded to me like you were saying they were desperate to stop it going to trial
I just think people should not get too carried away at this stage. Still lot of miles to go
Yesterday was good and bad news for me. There is something that is slightly bothering me .
Val...different govs obviously ..but I do AGREE with you...same xxxx
But it also supports my view that the gov want to be seen pursuing hard earned tax payer money.
If they win quick and cheap ..good
If it goes to trial...good
If they win...good
If they lose...good..they were seen to be chasing...money will make little difference to them anyway
Karen
We are not talking about the ramifications on them bring successful. We both are agreed on that if you read. I have already explained why I think they made the application..trying it on ....as val says on the cheap..cheekily. But that is a lot different to
"Be under no illusion , the govt wanted the case stopped "
You suggesting that they are desperate not to go to court..just doesn't make sense
Remember they are the ones taking ncyt to court in the first place.
"Disagree Cap, they wanted to win "on the cheap" now, the Dhsc know they cant!"
you are not disagreeing with me - that is what i am saying
they tried it on - tried to bully.
does not mean they are desperate not to go to court
"Yes CS , they did."
What? I still am not clear on what you are trying to say? they want the whole thing over? or desperate to avoid a trial
i still disagree no one in the gov will lose sleep over it going to trial
"If the DHSC had won instead of the application being dismissed , thrown out , not upheld , the consequences could have been dire for NCYT. The trial may very well have not proceeded with the judge saying no chance of success."
agreed..but as i said this was a good tactic for the gov legal team and trying to bully - doesnt mean they are desperate not to go to trial. they tried it on - it didn't work. i am sure there will be more fn an games to come
"to learn that they don't have us over a barrel over some technicality related to the contract, which may have been difficult to defend."
well i think it is jumping the gun to say that it is not difficult to defend against
it is still going to court an quite a lengthy court hearing
"The DHSC now will also know how NCYT intend to defend their claims re the tests suitability ( that is how the judge made her decision) and it may well result in them being more inclined to settle ,"
i suspect they knew this all along already - they have clearly had numerous talks before it even went to court.
plus if you look at the filings - the particulars of the claim were made as well as the defence. plus the amendments
furthermore nyct barrister already knew they had a weak case on the judgement.
imho i dont think anything new was learnt by other party yesterday other than a feeling for the judge
The reason i hoped for a settlement is that ncyt would still have considerable cash after the whole covid thing. lets face it this small penny share company did win the lottery...and ability to transform themselves.
court case does carry risk - no matter how strongly i feel they have a good case
a settlement would have seen both sides win something in my opinion rather than one losing big at court - whether it be cash/solvency or reputation
"Be under no illusion , the govt wanted the case stopped "
I am not sure what you are trying to say here?
if it that they want the whole thing over - possibly/probably ...although i am not sure anyone at dhsc is losing sleep
if it is that they are desperate at avoiding trial - then i disagree
the gov want the PR of chasing the money back...in some ways even if they lose they win. i believe the PR is worth much more to them than the millions of cash
they prob tried bullying ncyt before applying for court date. this pre trial judgement seems to be another bully boy tactic..which neither ncyt nor the judge fell for.
however that is what good legal teams do. make no mistake they have very strong representation as do ncyt
Harchris - the point i am making is that "it is out" in terms of the lab findings etc
yesterday was only the pre trial review - so there was not such a big deal but it will gain more traction when we get to trial. tbh i was surprised it was covered at all - i wasnt expecting that. an as i say unfortunately i don't think it did us a favour in terms of negotiation of a settlement.
you all know i previously was of the opinion that it will be settled pre court date.
I now feel it will definitely go to trial
are the public interested ?- prob not at all
however enemies of the current gov most certainly are..and the gov know this
imho it is all about optics....after the news yesterday if they were to settle then it would leave huge question marks that could be exploited.
eg who was this lab that the gov relied on ? if their findings are dubious who employed them?
if the findings were accurate then why are the gov not pursuing all hard earned tax payer money back etc etc
"The DHSC application for summary judgement was perhaps the last throw of the dice,"
It isn't it is going to court
Neil - the fact sky news covered it is enough mate - they are quite big you know - and other news outlets like msn and yahoo will link to the sky report anyway
but as you don't believe me
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/british-government-pursues-145-million-refund-over-allegedly-defective-covid-19-test-kits/ar-AA1nWiaF
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/government-seeks-145m-refund-covid-153300954.html
apology accepted!..lol