Member Info for ChrisToffer

Thanks Deas999, so Lot 1 looks unlikely to come with any firm guarantees on revenue however the company will be able to compete on a local level where there is demand. That may go some way to explaining the large network of new sales reps they have hired.

The framework also looks like it won't inhibit private sector growth in the way that a direct DHSC contract may have. Fingers crossed for more info in an Monday morning RNS. Hopefully they have their fingers in some of the other lots too!

Hi Kaeren, i actually only got in for a short term play at around 780p. Stuck with it now haha but glad i invested in a cash rich, money making company that has in-demand products. Shouldn't be stuck for long! :)

This award is up to 4 years so may cement annual revenue with the added effect of allowing the market to apply a sensible P/E ratio to the valuation. A proper P/E alone could multiply the SP. They won't need a lot of the entire £22bn to see a fast recovery here.

Sorry forgot to post link;

https://bidstats.uk/tenders/2020/W45/738394145

Correction, this is not an amendment to the £22bn tender, only the first lot award.

See this link and you'll see that the remaining £19bn is still due.

This is the amended £22bn tender that was put out in November 2020. If you click on the tender notice at the right hand side it takes you to the initial tender.

I guess how much of the tender any supplier relieves will depend on their capacity to meet demand and the usefulness of their products. Question is, do we find out a minimum amount or do we have to wait every quarterly update. Good news is that long term tender like this will warrant a much higher P/E.

"That has gone and wont be back esp with all this talk of Court action." What a load of nonsense. Firstly, there is no talk of court action. The contract has a clearly laid out process that both parties follow in the event of a dispute. A 5 day escalation period followed by 28 day arbitration. It won't go near a court.

Secondly, 50% of Q1 revenue was from private sector and international and thats only going to grow as the government continues to unshoulder the cost of testing onto the private sector.

The 50% warrants a higher market cap than the current one and as they continue to deliver and grow that income an appropriate P/E rate will be established and the SP will follow suit.

With the addition of Southwark that's around 1m people being asked to get a PCR test. Current UK capacity is about 650,000 tests a day. Its unsustainable for them to continue with this level of testing without the support of Novacyt as they will contribute (I would say in large part) to that capacity.

If there is still silence next week i would tend to agree with you however It's likely that the contract dispute is in the 5 day escalation period. Wouldn't you prefer they focused on finding a resolution?

People aged 11 and over who live, work or travel through the affected areas have been urged to take a Covid-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test, as well as using twice-weekly rapid testing.

The Department of Health and Social Care said the two boroughs were carrying out the "largest surge-testing operation to date", with additional testing sites being opened.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-56729607

If anyone thinks that NCYT's relationship with DHSC is broken they should ask themselves how Test and Trace can continue with this level of testing without the capacity of NCYT.

Thanks for this. The vans are presumably for couriering of samples . That doesn't necessarily rule out the use of Versalab. You could deploy 1 versalab and several Renaults that collect samples and bring them to the lab.

Completely agree on SNPSig! How does the DHSC achieve "the largest network of diagnostic testing facilities in British history" without NCYT's capacity? It doesn't add up to me.

It is a strange one and casts further doubt on the overall outlook. We shouldn't forget though that Novacyt have leverage in any dispute as they have products (namely Variplex) that the government need going forward.

https://twitter.com/NovacytGroup/status/1381875049557331972

They're implying that mutations will be the ultimate test going forward.

BTW, though the DHSC/NHS have supposedly got enough stock of PROmate for 2021, we could still see huge sales of SNPsig Variplex.

Bluelight, here is an example of another diagnostic player giving no 2021 outlook;

https://diasoringroup.com/sites/diasorincorp/files/allegati_pressrel/pr_diasorin_-_fy_2020_results.pdf

"Given the uncertainty of the macroeconomic and health context expected in the forthcoming months,
DiaSorin is unable to provide a guidance for the full year"

Incidentally, they bought luminex a few weeks later for $1.8B

I'm not sure its as straight forward as that. Expected income has halved at a time where the public sector is unshouldering the responsibility of testing onto the private sector. There will be growth on the 50% private sector revenue as people start to move around more. That will bring spikes and there is now a massive hole in NHS capacity.

*100% specificity

NUDGE has a peer reviewed pub in the lancet quoting 100% sensitivity but only 94% sensitivity.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(20)30121-X/fulltext

Doc, as per the December RNS;

Following discussions with the regulatory agencies, the trial has been amended as follows:

Addition of assessments for Long COVID-19 symptoms on day 60 and day 90.

Those endpoints, which have been added at the request of the FDA, are indeed to assess the drug as a long covid treatment. Calling other posters comments pathetic when you're on here spouting complete *******s. You're being disingenuous to this company and misleading to investors.

I only came on here to review an RNS and i'm starting to see why i stayed away so long.

Doc, the secondary endpoint updates to the SG016 Home trial parameters use exactly the same scales used as in SG018.
An example of the SG018 secondary endpoints read like this;

Number of patients with long-COVID-19 symptoms based on FACIT Fatigue Scale (Version 4) [ Time Frame: Day 15, Day 28, Day 60 and Day 90 ].

Does that not constitute an exploration of long covid treatment?