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.
Okehurst1 the "news" that ODX may sell CD4 is not new, it was mentioned at the investor meeting and was on the strategy review slide as an option, maybe I am missing something in the chairman's letter.
There are accounts for 20/21. Yes CD4 did incur losses in 19/20 as they were developing the product. CD4 is now approved by WHO, it would be disappointing, after many years of work, if they decided to not produce this test as it is potentially very profitable.
CD4 did not lose £2.5m the bulk of the global health loss related to scaling up for covid tests!
ODX stated that there would £800k sales for CD4 in second half! It is likely to have revenues of circa £10m this year. The health and nutrition business is profitable.
I have never been bothered by a lack of sartorial elegance, spivs are usually the sharp dressers!
Mugginsthedog this is what you said earlier and I agree "The funding is expensive but the company probably had little choice."
You need capital to grow and given the current SP as was explained by GB, a fund raise not viable.
You are entitled to interperate the information as you wish as am I, but please refrain from name calling, it diminishes your arguments.
DVRG have not issued a statement saying the brokers 2022 revenues estimate needs to be revised.
My understanding of the RNS re directors getting paid in shares, is rather than take the shares, as they were entitled to in lieu of wages, they took wages instead. GB has then reinvested his wages in the company purchasing the £20k worth. It also avoided a dilution in shareholder value. The interims (H1 21)had a operational cash burn rate of of circa £400k per month and another £100k or so in investing activities. They also paid off a £1m loan. We do not know the cash burn rate for H2 but we do know revenues increased which should have reduced the operational cash burn rate. We aslo do not know the cash burn rate for investing activities but I would expect them to have increased as the company grows we will need to wait for finals to find out. Re the mezzanine loan facility, it is within norms for this type of finance, albeit more expensive than other forms of funding. The key for me is why take it, if it's to fund significant growth in revenues short term and these revenues generate profits to cover interest rates all good imv. If it is used to support day to day operational spend then it is not a good deal. We will find out soon enough with repayments due commence in September.
Whilst the UK only imports minimal gas and oil from Russia and the focus is likely to be on expanding renewables, european countries like Germany and Italy are not in the same position and in the medium term will require to secure gas and oil elsewhere and the north sea could be a viable option. Hope so, as PMG could be well placed to benefit. Need to wait and see!
From the RNS 27 CTM units have a capital value of £0.76m or £28,148 per unit. The lease value for the 27 units is £1.83m over five years or £13,555 per unit per year. The lease value over the 5 years of £67,775 includes consumables and maintenance. If 200 units a month sold then you are looking at annual revenues £32.5m in year 1. Year 2 £ 65m, year 5 £162.5m. What the actual number of units sold will be and the profit levels from these revenues are currently the unknown, but the potential could be significant.
MSYS are far from being out of the woods yet. It may have a market cap of £7m, it is still loss making currently, albeit improving. It did have cash in bank at the interim's, (supporting it's sp) but suspect less now. Whilst DVRG got a company today for £1.1m, with a EBTIDA of £200k. Mezzanine finance suitable for latter, as the funding costs can be met, not for the former (MSYS). In 6 months, or a year or so, MSYS maybe a viable target and if the price is right. In that case, a rights issue maybe more apt for a cash offer, imv, enabling all shareholders participation, should they wish.
Argylerich certainly agree slippage on projects is the norm, perhaps more so these days with so many supply chain issues around the world. Like any good management team these have been identified and action taken to minimise the impact. Securing manufacturing capacity, at what looks like a very attractive price given it's profitability, is a canny move imv.
GB was clear as to why this route of funding was taken in the proactive interview. He did say on track for scaling up production by end of Q2, it remains to be seen if they achieve 200 a month, we will see soon enough. What matters is we will have the production facilities and finance are in place to support the various business segments expansion. Now we need the revenues, so looking forward to positive news flow on this front in the coming months.
Argylerich perhaps if you look at page 15 of Trat's posting history you will see a post that answers your question. Apologies for intervening but I find Trat's posts informative and helpful.
The rates being paid are within normal levels for this type of financing. The purpose of the funding is exactly what this type of funding is provided for and is indicative of the growth that DVRG is planning for. Investopedia give a good overview showing pros and cons of such funding. For me it's a good solution for DVRG at this time.
NU bit out of date with accounting rules, but does it not depend on the type of lease that is used when income from the capital sale is recognised as to the impact on revenues this year?
The FCA will no doubt investigate the leaking of the fund raise however the BoD had nothing to do with that. Re misleading statements, not sure there is anything to investigate from reading the RNS's. ODX were always quite clear the £374m was not an order for LFT's! It was the UK government who were to supply the test to be manufactured and as we know that did not happen.
TST are certainly winning new business on a regular basis and retaining existing clients. They now have a profitable and very cash generative business moving forward. This raises the question of what next, grow in an expanding market, via a complementary acquisition and/or stay organically? New product development? Will they pay dividends? Think the next year will see a bit of clarity re these questions!
NU thanks for clarifying. So in the 6 months to Jan 22 they sold circa 170,000 shares and the only way we will find out if they are continuing to sell is to await an update of shareholders holding via DVRG website.
If Helium are selling, would a holding reduction RNS not be required as they hold over 3% or did?