Member Info for donnodertrader

Bing that is just gratuitously offensive

i had the same reply to my email re communications sent last Wednesday. I have written again to say I have not yet had a reply. Clearly it is not good enough merely to change PR, it has to improve!

lol and why would that not surprise me!!!

i have not had a reply to my letter last week expressing concern about the company's communications. I have re-sent this morning.

No

can you say why?

Surge testing in Surrey was definitely pcr

at anyone time there may be a reason to put on hold on communications, but if you have been with this share for a year you will know without any doubt that there have been an enduring problem in respect of both public relations and investors relations In addition, the company covers many products for different purposes. So I can find no reassurance in a possible reason for non communication about one product at a specific time, when the empirical history of substantial weakness in communications has been evident for sometime.

report dated 4th February

now, we must be respectful of those who gleefully demonstrate their ignorance!

rubbish day!!!!

I thought I made it clear that the problem i see with the communications is how they are 'pitched'. Great information accurately presented, but without a recognition of the context in which the market will receive the information. The proof is there to see. In response to rns(s) and other media events when great information is presented, the share price drops, time after time after time.

I am afraid you are missing the point. the complaint about communication as PR or to investors, is not about rns(s) on demand, it is about the content of the communications, both rns(s) and other, limited, media efforts. As day follows night, the share price has dropped on all of them, because, although factually correct, they have not been well enough pitched to create confidence in the great information they contained.

the concern seems to be more about the saliva sample rather than the test per se! Ultimately the issue will be whether other tests produce better results based on saliva.

B2H you were right, that was exactly the reply I have just received.

this was my reply to that!!

Let me be clear, that I am expecting a response. Both in action and in writing.

that demonstrates disdain for shareholders

i am sorry but i will not accept that. i have never criticised the communications, without at the same time recognising what a great job GM and the company are doing. Even if there were a rns tomorrow that caused the share priced to jump, I would still be criticising their communications, because they are worthy of being criticised.

I just sent this. there is no point my complaining on here and not trying to do something ab out it!

I am sure it will not have escaped your notice that NOVACYT has a history of declining share price after each and every RNS since last March. Most of the time the problem was the communication of great strategic developments; but no figures of sales, capacity, or orders.

Then there was radio silence from July.

The January RNS, which included good figures, was sabotaged by the carelessly worded projection that income for 2001 was ‘uncertain’.

Then the interview reported today was, I am sure, factually accurate; but lacklustre.

The common theme is that this is a great company, lead by a great CEO; but there remains a problem with both public relations and investor relations.

I understand that public relations and investor relations does not come intuitively to everyone: and that in itself is not a problem. But, it becomes a problem if it is not recognised and rectified. It is a strength to recognise it, not a weakness.

I ask that you take this issue seriously and recognise the urgency of rectifying the problem.

i could accept that if these were 'normal' daily fluctuations. But serial reductions because of bad communications is something they should be concerned about.

lets remember a rns is not the only form of communication!!!!¬