Member Info for Dibs61

This has done Ed Meads reputation no good at all. I wonder if he regrets his decision to link up with this circus?

Let’s not forget 9p was a stubborm resistance level before. Now it becomes support.

Lincoln I make you 💯 correct. This drop has nothing to do with geopolitical concerns and all to do with ITCC decision to drop 160% tariffs on Chinese graphite. This is a typical knee jerk short sighted reaction by the market. BRES remain competitive with Chinese graphite re mining costs. The Chinese do have an advantage downstream with processing but BRES will solve that in P2.

Therefore, this is an excellent buying opportunity with so much positive newsflow coming.

Llama - your cynicism is admirable but not so. Yes of course PKB don’t charge patients it’s free for users because its a B2B model. They have clients (healthcare organisations) who would pay them service or license fees. It’s not a charity! That said, I do not know their current revenues because they are a private company but they have received significant loan funding for expansion and it’s clear it’s a growing business.

And I don’t think it’s been ‘given away’. The deal is likely each party takes a cut.

Vas exactly and 1000%. There has been such a dearth of positive news here it’s a no brainer. If Dr Oakley or any of his cohorts is viewing this board,RNS….Now!

I did think the same but surely not? 200 quid lol. The benefit of the positive publicity delivered directly to the market would, I am sure, outweigh the minimal cost. Baffling tbh.

Ps I see they have just posted it on LinkedIn too. No question in my mind this should have been an RNS.

It’s a positive development for sure. Why wasn’t it RNS’ed?

Apologies All for all the posts but I had to chop up the responses.

I suspect that Feedback, given everything we know about the product, were able to present a strong business case to the DHSC and NHS England. The benefits are obvious. It looks like a no brainer to me so it just comes down to funding.

The funny thing is that due to all the previous delays and disappointments the market isn’t pricing in a single cent of an NHS National contract success at a MC £6m and and at least £3m of that is cash.

Who knows where this could go if they land it? My initial guess is minimum 10x from here. And that’s just for starters. It would be a sticky contract with MRR/ARR. Does it get any better than that for steady regular cash flow? Or am I just getting carried away? 😅

3. Long NHS procurement cycles — NHS adoption and national contracts often take time and multiple pilots/validation steps.

⸻

📌 Bottom Line

Bleepa has achieved real-world traction with paid NHS contracts, national awards for clinical results, and deeper NHS system integrations — all strong signals that it’s building a credible market position. The pending national business case and strategic alignment with NHS reforms increase the likelihood of broader adoption, but success isn’t guaranteed — it depends on funding decisions and the pace of NHS procurement. Overall, the trajectory is promising but still emerging.

📌 Verified Contract Wins & Deployments

🏥 Major NHS Contracts

Queen Victoria Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

• Feedback was awarded a £495,000 contract to provide its Bleepa Community Diagnostics Centre (CDC) digital infrastructure after a successful pilot. This is a paid contract, not just a trial, and covers an initial 12-month term with a potential extension. 

🧪 NHS Pilots and Extensions

• Bleepa has been piloted and funded in Community Diagnostic Centre sites such as Oldham and regional integrated care areas beyond QVH, with further local NHS funding to extend pilots. 

• Earlier multi-trust contracts were awarded (e.g., two NHS Trusts for about £200k total in 2022), showing a history of adoption leading to contract wins. 

⸻

🏆 Recognition and Visibility

🏅 Awards

• The QVH–Feedback partnership won the Most Effective Contribution to Clinical Redesign Award at the HSJ Partnership Awards 2025 for using Bleepa to reduce wait times and inefficiencies. That kind of credible recognition from NHS stakeholders builds external validation and broad visibility. 

⸻

📈 NHS System Integration & Strategic Positioning

🛠 System Integrations

• Feedback has integrated Bleepa with key NHS digital services (eReferral Service, Personal Demographics Service, GP Connect), which is an important foundation for scaling across trusts and regions. 

📌 National Business Case

• As we discussed earlier, Feedback submitted a national business case for Bleepa as part of the UK NHS Spending Review process. This links Bleepa to potential national funding decisions, though the outcome is still pending. 

⸻

💷 Funding and Financial Position

🧑‍💼 Recent Fundraising

• In 2024, Feedback raised about £6.1 million via share issuance, strengthening its cash position and providing runway into 2027 — important for sustained development and sales efforts. 

💰 Revenue from Bleepa

• Bleepa accounted for the vast majority (around 89–90%) of recent revenue for Feedback, showing its dominance in the company’s business model, though overall revenue remains modest as of late 2025. 

⸻

📊 What This Implies About Bleepa’s Chances of Success

📍 Positive Signals

1. Paid NHS contracts — Real contracts with NHS trusts (not just pilots) show paying customers. 

2. Award recognition — External NHS awards help build reputation and credibility. 

3. System integrations — Technical readiness for wider adoption is growing. 

4. National strategy alignment — Submission of a business case for national support ties Bleepa to NHS strategy priorities. 

5. Fundraising secured — Recent capital raises support ongoing expansion and scaling efforts. 

⚠️ Challenges and Limitations

1. Modest current revenue levels — Revenue is still relatively small compared to broader NHS spend, and the company continues to operate at a loss. 

2. National funding still pending — The big national rollout depends on the outcome of funding decis

📌 Bottom Line

• Submitting a business case to DHSC and NHS England is a major strategic move — it means Feedback Medical is trying to secure national-level support and funding rather than just local contracts.

• It improves the odds that Bleepa could expand significantly across the NHS (and potentially beyond), but it does not guarantee success, because funding decisions and implementation depend on subsequent approvals, procurement decisions, and ongoing evidence of clinical and financial benefit.

Thanks Vas,

Interesting information…So following your question I asked another one… “ Who did feedback medical submit a business case for Bleepa to. And does this mean it is likely to succeed?”

AI Response:

Here’s what’s publicly known about who Feedback Medical submitted a business case for Bleepa to, and what that implies for its prospects:

📌 Who the Business Case Was Submitted To

According to recent information, Feedback Medical submitted a detailed business case outlining the national opportunity for its Bleepa platform to senior government and health system bodies in the UK. Specifically, this business case was submitted in the run-up to the UK Government’s Spending Review to:

• The UK Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC)

• NHS England (NHSE)

• Wider political stakeholders, including groups like the Tony Blair Institute (which often works with government on policy development) 

The business case was part of efforts to secure national funding or commitment for wider adoption of Bleepa across the NHS. While the headline spending figures from the 2025 Spending Review were announced by the Chancellor in June 2025, the specific funding allocations for detailed projects connected to Bleepa had not been confirmed at the time of the report. 

⸻

📊 Does This Mean It’s Likely to Succeed?

A submission of a business case to government and NHS leadership is a meaningful step — but it doesn’t guarantee success. Here’s what it does and doesn’t imply:

✅ Positive Indicators

• National-Level Engagement: Going to DHSC and NHSE shows Feedback is targeting strategic NHS priorities, not just local procurements. That’s a high-visibility stage. 

• Government Funding Cycle: Linking the case to the Spending Review aligns Bleepa with the NHS’s budgeting process, which is vital for larger, system-wide roll-outs. 

• Existing NHS Contracts: Feedback has won real NHS contracts and pilot adoptions (e.g., with Queen Victoria Hospital NHS Foundation Trust), demonstrating Bleepa’s practical utility. 

• Independent evaluations and awards: There is evidence (e.g., significant wait-time reductions and awards for NHS partnership work) suggesting clinical value. 

⚠️ Challenges / Uncertainties

• Allocations Not Confirmed: While funding was referenced in the Spending Review, the actual allocations to Bleepa-related programmes were not confirmed at the time of the latest reports. 

• Long NHS Sales Cycles: Digital health products in large public health systems like the NHS generally have slow sales cycles and complex procurement processes. 

• Revenue Impact Still Emerging: One analysis noted that improving revenue performance remains a key challenge, even with such strategic initiatives. 

Bottom line : Nothing has changed. The graphite is still there (in ever larger quantities).

The USA still wants it. NEEDS it. Perhaps more urgently than ever now.

Ignore short term volatility and noise. Amusing how the green boxes only appear today on a down day lol. Nowhere to be seen when the price was moving up.

Hold firm. Good news is on the way.

Aiminvesting - OBD?! 😳🤦🏼‍♂️

Vascular, I agree with you on both your posts. The only thing I would add (which you touch on in your second post) is the way the money will be spent, apportioning, etc. I think the actual overall sum is agreed. It’s just negotiating with trusts exactly how it will all be dished out. But it’s clear that digital technology is going to be key to their objectives. We are not going to see money diverted to pay increases like last year.

In the absence of any further financial constraints I am struggling to see how Bleepa will not play a role going forward.

Funding and planning in 2026/27 is focused on:

• Reducing waiting lists and improving access, especially same-day GP contact. 

• Meeting urgent and emergency care performance targets. 

• Boosting primary care capacity and staffing. 

• Achieving financial balance with productivity improvements. 

• Digital transformation and preventative care models. 

A lot of the above objectives and bullet points seem to tick the right boxes for Bleepa.

The money is there. No excuses anymore. If they don’t pick Bleepa now they never will!

It’s now or never.

As far as I can see funding for 26/27 has already been agreed (if ChatGPT is to be believed). Check out the following:

🩺 1. Core Operational Priorities (Medium-Term Planning Framework)

NHS England has published its Medium Term Planning Framework for 2026/27 to 2028/29, setting out national priorities and expectations for how money should be spent and services delivered in 2026/27. 

🎯 Overall Goals

• Reduce waiting times and recover elective services – part of a long-term push to return to performance standards lost post-pandemic. 

• Shift care from hospitals to communities with stronger local and preventative services. 

• Accelerate digital transformation so more services are digital-first and patients can book and manage care through the NHS App. 

📌 Specific Service Targets for 2026/27

Waiting Times & Access

• Trusts must significantly improve referral-to-treatment times – with performance improvement trajectories tied to planning submissions. 

• A&E performance targets and urgent and emergency care improvements are built into plans. 

Cancer & Diagnostics

• Higher standards for cancer waiting times and a target to reduce diagnostic waits over 6 weeks significantly. 

Primary Care

• Same-day urgent GP appointments become a core priority, backed by new contract terms and funding incentives. 

• Ring-fenced funding aims to recruit about 1,600 additional GP equivalents to support access. 

⸻

👨‍⚕️ 2. Workforce & Pay Commitments

• A 3.3 % Agenda for Change pay award for 2026/27 has been announced, helping ensure staff pay keeps pace with costs and is funded within the NHS budget. 

• Workforce growth, including GP recruitment and broader staffing strategies (linked to the NHS Long Term Workforce Plan), remain a funding and planning priority. 

⸻

💡 3. Financial & Delivery Framework

The planning framework sets expectations for how money is used and managed in 2026/27: 

• Balanced finances: Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) and providers are expected to plan to break even or deliver a surplus, with reduced reliance on deficit support. 

• Productivity improvements: All systems must contribute to the NHS’s ≥2 % annual productivity improvement ambition to free up funds for frontline services. 

• Financial regime changes: New payment models and transparency requirements are being phased in for 2026/27, rather than block contracts. 

⸻

🧠 4. Broader Policy & Strategic Shifts

The planning guidance ties spending to wider strategic aims: 

🌍 Care Model Changes

• Growing the role of neighbourhood health teams and community services to prevent admissions. 

• Increased focus on public health and prevention (e.g., weight management, digital health checks). 

📲 Digital & Technology Investments

• Expansion of digital tools for booking, records and communications is embedded in the plan, continuing into 2026/27. 

⸻

📌 Summary — What NHS England Is Prioritis

Iyan JORC ‘Close’ and Beehive is next…

Orom Cross is a MULTI deposit resource.

https://x.com/blencoweres/status/2028807469250580827?s=61&t=b2U20sE9RfPlg2VByT8yqA

100% there is a persistent background buyer mopping up all loose stock. Almost certainly an institution or fund judging by the pattern - frequently buying in approx £10k blocks rather than a ‘round number’ of shares

I wouldn’t be surprised if they stop (for now) just under the notifiable limit of 3%.

The closing price on Friday was 11.95 due to an UT.

The true closing mid price on Friday was 11.5