Member Info for Digittt

From my chat the suggestion is they are still cash strapped and the timing of payments in is lumpy (as batching and shipments are lumpy). Also that the relations with the local contractors are poor as we held back payments to them last year (as we had no cash), so we need to pay cash upfront for lots of things now. But would be good to see half year accounts to understand the gap to costs. Have to believe we are significantly EBITDA +ve although share price suggests maybe we aren’t.

Think they're looking at payback and the quicker payback the quicker they reinvest to open more. But they're also strugging still with cash I believe...something I don't quite understand given the quoted cost base and revenues.

I think the debt is holding us back, but I'm not sure £600k of interest (whatever the number is) paid in equity causes a rerate.

Thanks JHFH....that's a helpful reminder. We have some common and some different views on timelines.

Vlad said he expected movement on CAR-T first I think and you're right in that I do think announcements on that should be imminent given what we were expecting them to announce.

CDX...we are going to have to license IP from GlobalCo/Eli...my instincts are we don't have sufficient capital to develop that the way we'd like to and I can't see Eli putting more money in given they didn't see sufficient value when they said no to the option earlier in the year. I personally think CDX will slow down to a complete stop in the absence of another pharma coming out the woodwork or there being clear change in the Eli position. We might get some news on that vav licensing agreement and details may come out that completely prove me wrong...here's to hoping!

On CBR...I can't see a reason to get hyped to expect a CBR announcement now when Vlad to me has lowered expectations on timing. I have no idea why we would think anything different or expect something from it to land soon...other than if we were just being over-exuberant. I'm not trashing CBR...it sounds seriously promising, I just think things will take time.

Can someone remind me why we expect an RNS? The one I have in my head is on the suppliers for each of the CAR-T components. Is that right? Vlad suggested on his last interview I think that we would hear on CAR-T first. CBR is way off in my mind and CDX...well I have a (personal) view we can't afford a licensing agreement where we develop it further. Need Happy to be wrong, but I'm trying to gauge what are the follow ons from any CAR-T announcements would be...would it be a timeline to studies?

Downorup...in all of this, we do need to understand the cost base better. My understanding is we are still very tight on cash as costs are high../

Somm... I'm of a similar mind at the moment, but am still thinking a few things through. I'm still not convinced of what would happen if we didn't approve Res 1. My other thought is to reverse the vote...and vote Res 2 only. That way it's only [20%] to play with and contra to going for Res 1 (in my head at least) it might give MH the flexibility to use it for Res 1 purposes or Res 2. If MH has some influence over noteholders wanting shares, then he will have some flexibliity to swing it and be able to use it for liquidity / other purposes as he wants. I don't like the idea of completely tieing up mgmt's ability to be strategic or get an extra liquidity buffer (relying on the fact that mgmt is finally able to be sensibly strategic rather than those decisions of mgmts past).

Stevo...I posted a version of this earlier, but I think my phone lost it...or LSE lost it. You lost the crowd or maybe just me at "renumeration".

Your email is nothing like what I was expecting, not least of which I'm one of the shareholders who is happy to chat with Martin. I'm also happy with him having those chats as it's normal for a business (normally though Investor relations, but smaller companies it's all hands on deck). I've emailed you about it, but I'm not putting my shares behind that rant.

Stevo…you lost the crowd at renumeration. As far as addressing my concerns as an investor, this doesn’t. You can take my 7.4m shares off your list.

He’s busy applying for his Argentinian work permit through the Colombian embassy.

Folks - quick feedback from my chat. It was good to chat - MH though is now conscious that everything he says is immediately going onto these boards where there is opportunity for it to all be misinterpreted / lead to some shareholders feeling like they're being ignored. That is not his intention. The focus is now on the planned interview.

My personal take from it is very much in line with The_Linns interpretation - ie positive and sensible. If you back the mgmt team then you back someone who has reasonable ambitions for the company but who is still dealing with a bad hand from history. I'm not looking to hold their hands behind their backs while asking them to go and do their best for us. There is more that this company can do and I'm likely going to give it a chance to do it.

Bonkers was biotech shares through H1 last year. But I'll take whatever this is!

For the record, I was asked by someone on the Discord group to ask Martin for something similar on my call (they were asking for a chat session with mgmt)...I personally don't want a text only chat (like TWTT) - I prefer video. We need to be able to read body-language as well as personality.

If you haven't heard back, I can ask Martin on my call today his view on the session if you'd like. Wouldn't expect him to give me a firm yes or no, but might be able to glean his appetite (ie other than through not responding to an email). I'll just be a messenger on this so would respectfully ask for you to keep the safetys on your pitchforks and buckets of tar and feathers.

And you two have already proven my point. Call confirmed for tomorrow afternoon anyhoo.

Abzzba - I'm hopefully talking to Martin tomorrow - he replied to my email yesterday as well and offered to chat, but I could only do that tomorrow, although he was available yesterday. If he calls I'll be certain to not relay anything that could be useful given the response on the board yesterday to NYforever and The_Linns.

Abzzba, you make your own decisions. Sensible people on this board will make their own sensible decisions. If you've never talked to a CEO one on one when plenty others do, that's not a reflection on them.

I honestly think it's unlikely that's the case but it's exactly what I've asked him to clarify.

I can't remember us as shareholders being asked to approve the restructuring (don't think we were?) and with the shares being offered as payment I would have thought it might be required unless they only had a best efforts clause in there. I still think it's highly likely that's not the case though.

Drule, that’s why I asked if it was on a best efforts basis

Folks...The negotiations with the noteholders saved the company. Without those negotiations and the concluded restructuring we would not be sitting here squabbling about the dilution that it will cause if noteholders elect to take their interest in shares. It's idiotic to sit here and think this was willy nilly just given away with a free chocolate milkshake at the negotiation table. Did you all have no real sense of how much our backs were against the wall?

So you only have a company today because of what was agreed. Do I like it, not at all. Do I believe it was necessary...I accept it had to be.

Grill - I've seen best efforts used in other circumstances, but suspect it's less likely like you say. It's worth having that made clear though. Some terms can be end of negotiation points thrown in to drag one party across the line so can come with lower certainty (I'm not an expert I've just seen everything happen in negotiations for various reasons).
That being said issuances every year of €X00k or so (whatever the number...somm's quoted 70mn shares per quarter at current SP) can be catastrophic when the SP doesn't go up. In the worst instance they can be a regular drag on the SP similar to the death spiral from CLN's. I'll hopefully chat to Martin later this week. If it's a dead-cert that it is tickets for the company in the event a noteholder elects for shares and mgmt doesn't have authority to issue I would also have to vote for resolution 1...begrudgingly.

It's a firm no to 2...for the same reasons Somm has pointed out. We have enough at risk in MA-CL for the moment. When cash stabilises at a decent level, then go and play in Bolivia.