Member Info for DugWalker

Hi Agakhan,

Can't find anything about Sean Kramer on OBD's linkedin. I wonder if they were announcing his recent appointment as CDO at Zero Prostate? Zero Prostate is a US based cancer charity that, as far as I'm aware, has no direct association with OBD.

I reckon he's a fast milkman.

Your mum should apologise.

You feel like you were adopted? Has nobody told you?

@Dustyslay.

I sold a chunk.of my holding ahead of the placing. The talk of 3rd parties queueing up to buy rights to tests that have only been lab validated and that need to defy the experience of CIRT and PSE to be quick, near-term commercial successes was ridiculous.

I won't be reinvesting until I see a clear strategy to gain proper clinical validation at scale. Burrows belated statement that participation in Transform was critical is hard to reconcile with his ignorance of Transform and his actions. Appointing a 3rd party government lobbyist to pish for inclusion does not suggest it (Transform) is a priority. If they end up financing their own randomised control trial expect at least another tranche of placings.

@ Kong @ Aga.

Don't overlook the Chairman's role in the ongoing fiasco. He has allowed a culture of cronyism to take hold, seems to endorse an out of control burn rate that includes the costs of .3 labs, multiple V.P.'s and S.V.P.'s, attendance at and sponsorship of numerous international conferences. Why is he not demanding clear differentiation of the roles and performance indicators of the burgeoning senior management team. Why is he not insisting on a clear commercialisation strategy when it is clear the current reliance on peer to peer sales is failing?

So to summarise you have no evidence to support your claims of insider trading , just a conspiracy theory style suspicion that it's definitely taking place.

As for naivity, Shore is Nomad to many companies with much larger mcaps than OBD and they have to be licensed by the Stock Exchange to do so. You are accusing them of systematic insider trading on a public Internet forum. That's beyond naive and unless you can back up your claims you might be well advised to desist.

If you do have evidence you can take your evidence to the FCA

https://www.fca.org.uk/markets/market-abuse/how-report-suspected-market-abuse-individual

There is much to criticise the BoD over but conspiracy theory style speculation simply detracts from legitimate concerns.

...and of course a Nomad will happily jeopardise an entire business segment, not to mention it's reputation as a trustworthy broker, by partnering a minor client in a spot of criminality. I take it you know their primary responsibility as a Nomad is to ensure compliance with Stock Exchange regulations?

@MrHope.

I think you are overestimating the guile of this BoD.

These are the guys that told us sales were growing exponentially only to publish sales figures showing a decline a few months later. How did that play out for the share price?

They raised now to avoid taking a credit facility whilst interest rates remain high. The investors participated to avoid the value of their existing investments plummeting. The only thing that restores confidence here is a substantial increase in sales and the BoD has told us that won't happen until they get these tests incorporated into medical guidance notes. That is what the 2 latest V.P.'s have been charged with.

Incompetence ineptitude, cronyism and part-time roles for king size wages are bad enough, but now we have folks purporting that the board are providing confidential insider information to the largest shareholder. Come on folks, really???

There's more than enough to criticise this lot for but it lacks credibility to suggest criminality without proof. Anyone that genuinely believes it is happening should report their reasoning and evidence to the NOMAD (Shore Capital).

If they miss out on Transform and have to do large scale randomised control trials for CIRT and PSE they will need a large placing to finance those. The trials will take at least a year to complete and they will need further placings to cover opex during that time.

There is a strong liklihood that participants in the Transform project will be known by end April. I'm not optimistic that OBD will be one of them.

Hi Tav,

Your analysis of the numbers of sales from national screening programme are spot on. My fear is that missing out on Transform will highlight the scale of the missed opportunity to many that are still taken in by the spin from Burrows. It will also bring the incompetence and ineptitude of the BoD into sharp focus.

If I am right in my suspicion that sales are stalled by the lack of clinical validation then they will miss the quickest, largest and most cost effective way to attain that validation and sales will continue at insignificant levels for the foreseeable future. OBD certainly cannot afford to finance their own randomised control study at a scale that would convince the relevant regulatory bodies. In my opinion the market will respond appropriately and it won't be a positive response.

@Krull.

Our CEO seems to be economic with the truth habitually.

In the case of the critical sales person and his belief that this was a credible explanation for declining sales, he may just have demonstrated that he is too dumb to walk upright.

@ Serendipity.

A University based study with a budget of just over 100k and focused on a small number of black men does not cut the mustard. Go read the National Screening committees remarks about the Stockholm 3 test which has been used on a cohort of thousands. They do not regard it as adequately diversified by age or ethnicity. You don't get around such concerns with a £100k University project. Transform on the other hand has a budget of £42 million!

@ Mr Hope.

There is a long history of AIM companies going bust shortly after 'successful' placings. A placing is, in reality, an indicator of failure as it makes plain the fact that the company cannot survive without external funding from shareholders. They need to demonstrate they can sell, and if, as I suspect, they cannot do so because the medical community considers there tests to be inadequately validated, they will continue to struggle to do that.

Institutional investors are not immune to making losses in AIM. Maybe Vulpes felt the need to demonstrate confidence in order to shore up the value of their existing investment?

I can see this dropping to much lower over the coming months. Transform will soon announce participants and if OBD is not involved it'll be a blood bath.

@ Krull ,

They must surely know that experts in the field like Prostate Cancer UK, who recognise the potential of the test, are demanding further extensive validation before they will consider the test to be proven? Medics in the US may well share that view. There is certainly a clear and demonstrable reluctance for medics to adopt CIRT yet we were told just a couple of months ago that sales had fallen from the peak of 3 a day because one critical sales person took leave of absence. I had hoped he/she would be back on the job by now and that with a sales team bolstered by yet another two V.P.'s, sales growth would have prevented the need for such a significant dilutive placing.

Sometimes I wish I could be a glass half empty sort. It'd save me a lot of money.

Serendipity,

The Transform trial will be fully funded by Prostate Cancer UK in conjunction with the UK govt. Far from costing OBD money it would in reality cover some of the overheads and establish a meaningful revenue stream for the PSE test. Furthermore it would ensure validation at scale in a randomised control trial. I suspect it is the absence of such evidence that has prevented the take up of tests in spite of the fact costs are covered by insurers in the US (and in the UK in the case of CIRT).

Proper clinical validation at scale is needed for these tests. It is, frankly.negligence on a massive scale that OBD has not prioritised the Transform trial.

@Serindipity.

I have been a strong advocate of OBD's participation in Transform and first wrote to investor relations about this about 6 months ago. Burrow's was totally unaware of the potential and basically read from a crib sheet to appear informed during his most recent webinar. He stated that the company has employed a third party government lobbyist to try to ensure participation. When I asked which member(s) of the senior management team were responsible for ensuring participation I got no response. Do not hold your breath in anticipation that OBD will be participants in the biggest national screening trial in decades.

I find it astonishing that company of circa 50 employees that sells less tests per day than the fingers of one hand needs 3 laboratory facilities. Why do we continue to pursue the notion of a U.K. lab to meet the local market 'demand' when no such demand exists? Why, when Burrows has once again stated that he is prioritising the US market, do we still have a laboratory in Malaysia?

It is sheer extravagance and cannot be justified on any commercial basis.

Why is the Chairman not challenging such blatantly unjustifiable overheads? Whilst he is at it he could perhaps push the notion that we cannot afford to pay a CEO more than half a million a year when he has failed to secure any meaningful revenues yearsafter the launch of the company's so-called flagship product.

By refusing to provide a full year of working capital the market is sending a message, but will the BoD heed the message and cut costs accordingly? I say no. They have no commercial acumen and are only interested in lining their own pockets at the expense of their shareholders.

Oxford BioDynamics PLC (AIM: OBD, "OBD", the "Company" and, together with its subsidiaries, the "Group"), a biotechnology company developing precision medicine tests based on the EpiSwitch® 3D genomics platform, is pleased to announce that it has successfully raised gross proceeds of £9.9 million pursuant to a placing, conducted via an accelerated bookbuild process (the "Placing"), through direct subscriptions (the "Subscriptions") and a retail offer via the PrimaryBid Platform (the "PrimaryBid Offer") (all together the "Fundraising

So Wiseys which bit of "Pursuant to a placing AND a retail offer' is giving you a problem.

The annual burn rate is about £12 million before you take inflation into account and there is no indication that they have plans to reduce that anytime soon.

What they got doesn't give them enough.to cover the current burn rate for a year.

If our Chairman had a backbone he'd be demanding Burrow's resignation and a cost cutting programme to try to restore some shareholder confidence.