Member Info for ChrisToffer

My thoughts exactly Neil. As frustrating as it is, DA is known for being very hot on strategy therefore I doubt he'll give anything away until the timing is right.

I believe she worked with DA at Aegerion, which also got taken over.

Ted, for a second i thought that was gonna be a Waterford whispers news article haha

You're correct K I've seen it too. UNICEF have a catalogue price of c$.7 a test

The value if the 14m tests is on the RH chart. $1.4m. Thats about $9 a test Total value of all that procurement is $120m (on previous page).

I suspect this is just tests procured by UNICEF so doesn't include the likes of the Ukraine order for $10m+ that NCYT got early this year. That deal was via UNICEF so I figure was for their catalogue price of c.$7 a test.

Its really nice to see primerdesign having so much share of the pie.

Great Post (as always) Hillseeker! Spot on.

I also think trying to time a dispute resolution is a dangerous game because, at these levels the SP has taken such a hammering for the reasons you've stated, if a resolution lands itll be very hard to get in on the way up.

SD, if you use London stock exchange for the RNS its a hyperlink to both lists within the RNS.

Globetrotter, please point the evidence that the dispute is likely to be resolved in favour of government.

They aren't going to provide a plan B in an RNS that clearly lays the blame for £3m revenue drop at the door of the government.

That would effectively give the government an out when they've royally shafted the company (and us) all year. Infact, this goes for all the comms this year. The company cannot shout from the rooftops how well they're doing when they're potentially building a case for damages against the gov.

That aside, the numbers speak for themselves, the underlying business is still gonna make £40m EBITDA and they still have enough cash to cover all outcomes.

Hi John, I haven't seen any evidence to suggest the dispute is tied up with the good law review. If it were i would have expected that material news to be released. The company have stated that it's under the terms of the NCYT/DHSC contract that both parties are bound to non-disclosure. As long as it remains under the terms of the contract i think this dispute os just between the 2 parties.

Levincoolpal, to look at it from a 2022 perspective; The company earn non-disputed £8.33m a month and whilst these products are not approved they will be without 1.5m of that. So possibly reduces the same 100m next year to about 84m.

However that assumes there is no more international growth, that there is no resolution to the DHSC dispute, that none of the products, or subsequent products get approved, that the company sits on the cash pile and doesn't use it to invest in non covid business.

Tut tut Dunchallas, you're paraphrasing James Mccarthy in the investor presentation. The full statement was, 'we think covid revs have an annual half life, however that doesn't mean novacyt revenue will decrease.'

Anyone can go and watch that back to confirm. Be careful of duncs motive.

It's potentially £1m off the EBIDTA. Thats about 800k from the cash position. I.e 0.01% of the 77.2m H1 cash position.

Anyone getting in a flap over this needs to take a look at the bigger picture

P100, The dispute, drop in testing cases in spring and the fact this is a small (but growing) company in a diluted market are all factors that led to the SP being where it is. Thats all business. The effects of these factors on the SP are accentuated by PIs (i.e sentiment) but to blame it all on sentiment is a mix up in priorities.

Investestments are only dead if the company goes bust (highly unlikely here) or the shareholder sells due to lack of patience or budgeting. AIM is high risk but like all shares you have to be prepared to wait it out.

Pi100, sentiment is a fickle beast so if thats what you're focusing on youre playing a dangerous game. Company is still on target for minimum 40m ebitda - that's what'll matter in the end

Hillseeker, I think that's a great point. 3% is immaterial so there must be other reasons for this.

One thing it does prove is just how robust the excl.DhSC revenue is. £3m is feck all going into q4

Great stuff on the Janet Kidd link Exmex! Thank you.

Worth pointing out the details of the PerkinElmer deal there. Whilst she was GC at Oxford immunotec they got bought out for just under $600m. Previous year revs were just shy of $40m. A massive 15x sales. The deal represented 99% premium on their Enterprise value

It would appear on the RNS by default because if, as was suggested by our resident doom merchant, the recent spike was the company buying back shares then this RNS would show less shares in issue than usual. The fact there are still over 70m shares means the company have bought nothing.

There is bound to be plenty they can shout about but while they sit on a giant pile of cash the market is useless to them. They don't need to pump the price cause they dont need to raise money. If they can avoid announcing stuff, and therefore letting competitors in on what they're doing, i think they probably will.