focusIR May 2024 Investor Webinar: Blue Whale, Kavango, Taseko Mines & CQS Natural Resources. Catch up with the webinar here.
Frustrated that Burrows fails to recognise that the world beyond his inner circle does NOT agree with his repeated assertion that PSE is fully validated. One of the groups that disagrees with him is Prostate Cancer U.K. They have publicly stated that the data from the prostogram trial is insufficient and that further evidence is needed from randomised control trials conducted at scale. They identify shortcomings of the prostogram trial such as lack of ethnic diversity and low participation numbers. This is why the Transform Prostate trial is an absolute 'must do' for OBD. Sadly I thought Burrows was very unconvincing with his discussion of the Transform trial. He started by waving his 'notebook' at camera as if to suggest he is fully informed, but it appeared to me that he used it as a crib sheet that he seemed to be reading from.
@NU,
I think we are in agreement about some form of J.V. or partnership.
The board has brought us to a precarious position. It isn't unknown for companies with the clout to take control of IP only to suppress its exploitation if they believe they can use that to their benefit (e.g. promoting alternative solutions, disadvantaging competitors etc.). Time to cross fingers and hope our board begin to show more commercial nous than they have to date.
Hi NU,
I agree that licencing to big pharma could be a way forward, but it is not necessarily a panacea. I have some personal experience of licencing albeit in other branches of industry. It is frequently the case that those with a tried and tested route to market hold the whip hand in negotiations and extract a significant 'price' in return. If it is a matter of survival for OBD as an independent entity.dont be surprise to see them.lose control.of elementsbof their IP rights. Patent maintenance costs are very significant nowadays. I would not be surprised if a potential partner offered to pay some of those patent fees in return for a major chunk.of any incomes derived.
Re management stating that a placement won't be at a discount, they also said CiRT sales were on an exponential growth trajectory back in June/July. As Dibs says it is hard to take anything they say at face value now.
In addition I am increasingly concerned as to.tbeir ability to commercialise our products. Burrows insistence that P2P via medics is the way to go is looking seriously flawed. The numbers don't lie, but claims that sales stalled because 1 guy was sick suggest there mIght be less honesty elsewhere in our processes. Bedides, I thought it was the doctors that would do the selling so why are the numbers of doctors engaged not growing with awareness?
A competent sales plan will recognise that there are multiple demands to meet. Pricing for bulk purchases. early adopter deals, after sales support , technical differentiation, logistics, delivery times even performance guarantees are factors customers will need addressing but how do you do that when your focus is very much on the end users?
Educating the end users (doctors) is just one facet of many. Front line doctors do need to be on board but they can't sell to their purchasing managers.
I had thought these other elements of the sales process would be understood and properly addressed but perhaps I was presumptious to do so.
As things stand I see the SP sliding continuously until their is positive news on revenues and that seems a long way off. If we don't get taken over at a a hefty discount, I see a significant erosion of our asset value as we hold a car boot sale of intellectual.property in order to survive. All hugely disappointing.
The big sells will hopefully dry up in time, however, I had been expecting an RNS announcing the UK lab this month. Yesterday he said it will not be ready until end March. Partnerships require negotiation and legal input both of which take time. I'm struggling to see positive news ahead of Q2 so see this sliding back into the teens.
'Watching the show' is quite appropriate even if I get immediate visions of kermit and miss piggy. What a farce. Burrows has to go unless he manages a minor miracle in quick time.
@44x.
The ironic thing is I don't believe short term expectations were that high!. I'd have been delighted with monthly CiRT sales of around 200. Sadly our CEO's reliance on P2P as his preferred route to market has been disastrous. His arrogant 'putting to bed' of the hope that 770 sales might have been achieved in the post reporting period suggests he actually thinks that was an unreasonable goal.
It's going to take much more than a 10 million placing to see us through to profitability based on current performance. I wouldn't be surprised if we get bought out at a heavy discount that won't compensate shareholders for our losses. The begging bowl is not a good look.
Not sure what you expect from shareholders given the ineptitude and misinformation.
I raised the questions about FDA looking to overhaul the regulations on the use of LDT's in the US markets. My understanding is that by bringing these tests under the oversight of the FDA they will demand more rigorous and extensive testing regimes ahead of commercialisation. This is just one reason why I thought participation in the UK screening trial would be a must do. If they don't secure an involvement now, when it was in their gift to submit an application ahead of the deadline, questions need to be asked about management foresight and competence. Burrows said it himself yesterday, a £42 million funded trial for a national prostate screening programme and with a ground breaking test that promises to be the best, we may find ourselves excluded! Unbelievable.
Another warning signal to me was the reluctance to set sales targets for CiRT or PSE. Without such targets how are they setting personal key performance indicators? We ought to know how they are measuring up against their performance metrics otherwise how do we know their bonuses are justified?
Hi GMS
I fear the news on PSE is completely overshadowed by the failure to see any growth of CiRT. As we have discussed previously, had they reported something in excess of 200 CiRT sales per month we would have been on a course that promised profitability this year. To get close to that we need to be hitting 5000 PSE tests per month. I just can't see that happening quickly enough to avoid another placing.
Last night I took a look back at some of the company posts following the workshops on CiRT that it has held in the US. Previously I had not been too concerned by OBD's use of phrases like 'robust discussions' or 'candid feedback' but now I'm beginning to wonder if there is something we are missing, something the oncologists don't like that has stalled any progress on sales. Perhaps there is a widespread reluctance to rely on an LDT to determine treatment options for something as serious as cancer when the evidence is still based on a very small sample size. Yesterday's figures certainly suggest I was overly optimistic to be looking for 200+ Cirt sales in Dec.
I plan to ask investor relations why there has been a lack of transparency in their dealings with shareholders. For example why did Burrows talk about exponential growth of CiRT sales through June/July, only to say yesterday they knew it was a spike? Why was there no RNS about Ryan Mathis's appointment when they were so keen to suggest it would be transformative for CiRT sales and hence was price sensitive information? Why did they not submit a proposal to the Transform Prostate project prior to the submission for deadlines, so that we now find ourselves dependent on a government lobbyist to try to ensure involvement?
As for the partnership.prospects why were we not exploring those options rather than awaiting unsolicited approaches from 3rd parties? I can't imagine a big company rushing to be charitable in its dealings with a company that cannot afford to maintain its patent rights if things continue as they are.
I can but hope yesterday marks an end to management obfuscation and they begin to demonstrate a capability to sell products.
I was dissapointed, and thought it telling, that they did not invite any 'live' questions. I wanted to ask how the intended to guage the success of the BUPA partnership in the coming year (how many sales). I completely agree the insurers have a vested interest in pushing their medics to use the tests. I need to re-listen to the webinar, but I think when discussing BUPA he said something implying OBD would be holding seminars for the BUPA oncologists which sounds a bit like the US model of P2P sales again.
Dibs,
You were equally adamant and since interpretation of a hopelessly ambiguous RNS was a binary choice, you got lucky and came down on the right side of the division. I ain't apologising because I didn't write the RNS nor am I in any way responsible for today's drop.in the S.P. I find it rather infantile that you think I should.
I plan to write to investor relations and one of the questions will relate to the stagnation of the number of doctors in the P2P sales group. If that was going to plan I'd have expected numbers in that group to have at least doubled since July.
I wrote to them earlier this year about OBD's participation in Transform Prostate and got fobbed off as they said information related to that would need to be released by an RNS. I wrote to them.because it seemed to be a god sent opportunity to validate the test in a randomised trial conducted at scale. It always struck me that this would be a more powerful catalyst for commercialisation than the sales efforts of a few dozen unpaid medical recruits operating, presumably, on a part time basis.
Dibs,
No intention of getting into an infantile mud slinging bout. I will simply say I have been otherwise occupied most.of today and only just managed to catch the webinar.
He tacitly acknowledged that there was confusion and gave the impression that they had received a number of questions about the 770 CiRT tests.
The RNS was terribly structured and it now transpires that talking about a total of 770 tests in a section dedicated to the post reporting period was hopelessly misleading. I don't know why you think my interpretation was any less valid than anyone else's at the time I made my remarks.
If it makes you feel vindicated to single me out for comment fill your boots. I'm sure it will help compensate you for any loss you made today.
@GMS
Why would they report total sales since June '23 in a section updating progress since the end of the financial year? That makes absolutely no sense.
Right at the beginning of the RNS they give a figure of 516 for the financial year. Given that the update of 90 came in June/July and since numbers prior to that were in the low 10's per month , they must have maintained or exceeded 90 for the few months up to end Sept to reach that 516 figure. Co tinued growth at a rate of circa 20% per month gets you to where we are now e.g. 770 sold since Oct.
@GMS
'To date' is just another way of saying 'so far'. So my interpretation is 770 'so far' in the post year end period.
If I'm correct would that not exceed your expectations as stated only recently? Seem to remember you suggesting I was being too optimistic projecting a monthly figure of 200-250 by now.
The 770 sales figure is given in the section entitled Post Year End Highlights. There is no doubt in my mind that it is the total since October 1st last. Might be a more than a few regretting selling come 4:00 p.m. today