Member Info for Fevertreeman

If Illumina was in the frame for serious commercial terms, Newland would be obliged to issue an RNS. The fact that we have no estimate for current year forecast tells its own story. Ignore Illumina its a side show....for now....focus attention on AZ & Eisei

I mean this is appalling! Revenue growth FY2024 over FY2023 is 31% so from a miserable £2.2m to a deeply unimpressive £2.9m (which is below the company low ball revenue warning f £3m-£3.6m, and light years away from the confident 3x increase in revenue to £6m he punted last summer..).

So lets just dissect that TU statement a little more.....lets say that revenue growth more than doubles over FY 24 up from 31% to say 75% ...a headline increase of 75% looks great but that would still be only another £2.1m ...taking us to £5m which is still double digit shy of what Newland confidently predicted he would deliver for 2024!!!

Not the ideal slot - lunch time

Thanks for this

VIews on what happens to investment thesis if Trump secures access to Ukraine ciritcal metals?

I am a holder too. I am optimistic but there are a lot of issues to overcome chiefly SCALE UP CHALLENGES- manufacturing at scale especially where innovative tech is involved is notoriously tricky, so the team needs to be thinking long and hard about specialist recruitment, quality assurance & consistency, cost to produce, bottlenecks etc etc etc.....so just because it works at demonstration level doesnt necessarily follow....Either way likely to need (1) lots of capital investment & (2) same for working capital. For former they should be in line for capex grants etc....for W/c they will need to tap s/holders

And as far as reducing debt, YE gearing of c40% is crimping their room for manouevre, hence why they are focused on increasing rate of asset divestments, which goes hand in hand with share buybacks given what's been said

Sounds like a plan.

So next time there is a discussion around the machine , I suggest you ask Newland how many of the installed base have actually paid the sticker price. I think you will find that the answer is not forthcoming, because in reality there is discounting & some are handed over for free.

Enough to make a dent turn....on stock bought in the 10s, and 11s

IMO Newland cannot attempt a raise without some cast-iron positive commercial news. Remember he announced the raise on June 5th, the same day he published FY23. In the prelims RNS Newland made this statement in Outlook section:

"the management remains confident in delivering strong growth in 2024 in line with current market expectations." , asterisked as £6.4m....The cynic would think that he was again pushing the envelope just to get the raise away, because 4 months later that estimate had halved. The point is that Newland has burnt so many investors that no one is going to support a raise of any magnitude based on continued this sort of 'magical thinking'. I await news of commercial contracts with considerable interest (and hope)

So, yes indeed, I sold some @16.5p because the share price had been ramped by Newland. Like you I think the tech is strong, like you there is a strong future for liquid biopsy, and like you I want Angle to succeed. However, every time we think Newland & Griffiths have stopped their shenanigans and sleight of hand, we're presented with the counter-factual: changes in estimates slipped in (£2.9M below estimate), hyperbole & obscurantist language, and a lack of management maturity for which I blame the board.

Newland & Griffiths are utterly hopeless at providing any meaningful revenue or cash break even guidance. Worth remembering that Newland 's forecast for FY24 was a TRIPLING OF REVENUES TO £6.4M.....this then got HALVED to £3-£3.6m in September, and then in last month's Trading Update suddenly its £2.9m.............so do they have a handle on forecasts? NO they bloody don't! if they don't have a handle on revenues, then nothing that Abbott & Costello pronounce regarding deals, potential deals or flummery about Illumina's collaboration should be relied on.

To be frank, Newland's irresponsible hyping of the Illumina c-marketing push says it all. We were told this was their " first joint marketing initiative". We were not told whether the status of this initiative; there was no mention of formal signing, letter of intent; memorandum of understanding etc etc etc...it was also not a joint press release, which would have been far more significant, signed off by both companies, but Newland's alone. All this strongly suggests that Newland was desperately pumping/hyping again. POV of Illumina my view is that they said "OK . ok you can have the 1 hr slot, no skin off our nose to trail it and see if there is any customer interest."...... TBH if there had been hard commercial terms behind this, Nelwand would have pounced and raised cash (lat raise was only in June) but the fact that he didnt is IMO because there is no commercial deal there with Illumina. SO ignore the nonsense that Newland spouts - s/holders focus should be on AZ & Eisei - everything else is window dressing.

Newland & Griffiths are utterly hopeless at providing any meaningful revenue or cash break even guidance. Worth remembering that Newland 's forecast for FY24 was a TRIPING OF REVENUES TO £6.4M.....this then got HALVED to £3-£3.6m in September, and then in the Trading Update suddenly its £2.9m.............so do they have a handle on forecasts? NO they bloody don't! if they don't have a handle on revenues, then nothing that

It really isn't about at what price, but more the message that directors purchases give to the market & investors i.e. confidence in their own stewardship of the business & its future prospects. Sadly this sort of non-support is rife in the smaller cap universe. The fact that neither Newland or Griffiths have made major purchases outside of fund raises does not go unnoticed by institutional investors or for that matter potential clinical & commercial collaborators. Newland talks a huge game but he has yet to prove that he backs his mouth with his wallet

If that were the case EC then Newland and Griffiths would have loaded up on numerous occasions over last 12 months. The fact is they haven't, and given their appalling track record on revenue guidance I'm not massively surprised. Mr Market is fully aware of the yawning chasm between what Newland says/promises and his non-actions to support his growth thesis in share buying

And given the likely level of civil service oversight, political interference, and potential for continued poor PR on a contract where Capita has been rounded criticised, I suspect that there wont be many tears shed by the CEO, assuming he believes he can allocate those resources on higher margin contracts.

Newland needs sustained commercial newsflow to support another equity raise imo. More clinical research papers is not going to work however much he attempts to inflate the importance. AZ and Eisei moving forward with £££ commitment and another £££ commercial deal is what is required. If that happens then I will be happy to support the next raise, but Newland has to deliver

Note that the Board has virt no skin in game , excuse put forward is some nonsense about conflict of interest which is ludicrous. Similes Newland & Griffiths have consistently refused to put their own money into the business preferrring to get riskfree share options. Only when raising funds where they are forced to buy shares have they participated and even then it has been sub optimal

Agree with your view. We remain miles off from Newland’s predicted tripling of revenues that was supposed to happen in YE24 to c£6.4m. Newland’s hyping antics do not help his commercial credibility - potential commercial partners don’t like being used to pump up share price, but Newland apparently can’t help himself.