Member Info for JimiHendrix

Yes although the method with which they've aquired the recent funding is not much like a real business, dependeing whether forward selling was involved. They must now make a success of POC and AIHL, then they'll be a real business. I fear we could be waiting another 3 months at least to see the results of these new employees. A company I worked for expanded in the early years after receiving proper investment, employed loads of new staff and did very well but it took months to see the results.

We'll probably get a few nice spikes over the next few months, but the real fruits - asuming the new team delivers strong sales will be end of H1 2022 imo. I'm also mindful of the results due next month - we know they won't be good but market makers always seem to punish the shareprice unless they're unexpectedly good.

We should have some of these planned new people onboard within 1-2 months I would imagine, they're going to be busy interviewing for so many new positions.

It should be investigated, because as far as I have read it is illegal to forward sell unless the shares have been deemed to exist (resolutions passed etc).

Davemcmanus, that would be 'naked short selling' though, as the shares only illegally existed after the general meeting. Which is illegal. There's no way there was enough stock floating around otherwise for them to sell the amount placed.

I want to know whether the placing was forward sold or not - that makes a huge difference in trying to make sense of everything and form a strategy. There hasn't been a huge amount of volume except for the India approval leak... I keep wondering if that was ramped by the placee market makers to forward sell a load of stock. Generally over the past few months it hasn't felt like forward selling was going on.

PCR tests are just the most common kind of molecular test. The POC test is also a molecular test. It’s the fact that they are molecular tests rather than antigen tests that makes them so accurate. I don’t think the government will have a problem with the POC test but there may need to be something that formally says in writing that these are acceptable PCR alternatives. In what situation were the DNA nudge tests being used? I don’t believe they were PCR.

Long term holder here since Onzima days! Those patents could turn out to be very lucrative, if for instance another company or indeed a big Pharma wants to develop their own version they would have to buy one (or more) of N4P’s patents. Of course having the patents also encourages big Pharmas to partner with us rather than attempting to do themselves and risk being sued.

Something isn't right about these apparent huge buys... smells fishy

Might be related to the open offer/placing shares.

Yes looks like a delayed sell unfortunately. I expect better action over the coming weeks, when more exciting news should arise.

Yeah I think volume will pick up on any decent concrete COV19-ID news which is expected within the next few weeks, such as distribution partners, biosafety study results, ce marking, initial orders etc. And of course when AIHL is launched with details of the initial orders. I expect there will be another update a day or 2 after the placing is approved.

Ethics are at the very heart of it Dave lol...

"genedrive plc (AIM: GDR), the near patient molecular diagnostics company, announces that full ethics approval from the NHS Health Research Authority and ethics committee has been received for the use of the Company's Antibiotic Induced Hearing (AIHL) test in hospital trials for clinical validation. The Company believes that this represents the world's first ethical approval for a point of care genetic test used to influence neonatal management in an acute setting."

Lummy, 2 (bid) vs 1 (ask) on level 2... not a masisve selling off at all.

"They are operating AS a university research lab as they research and develop products, however there is never any re effort to commercialise it and they move onto the next R&D project with a fresh grant to fund it. Sound familiar??"

Again, completely wrong. They have been trying to commercialise everything they've done, hence why Budd was brought in to the company (check out his sales background). Admitedly he still has some way to go there, however, with AIHL & POC commercial launches on the horizon and a new in-house sales team coming in soon things are evidently heading in the right direction.

The whole company was created to commercialise the Genedrive device, they are far from a researched focused lab for a university.

No Dave, I often agree with some of your points but you do clearly either have an agenda at the moment or haven't researched Genedrive very much...

"The problem is clearly not big enough for the NHS, hence it has been unaddressed and Genedrive have seen an opportunity for a research project."

The NHS actually funded this project, hence the NHS has very much been addressing the problem - with Genedrive.

Genedrive are also not operating as a university research lab! lol.

"The Manchester Incubator Building is a state-of-the-art biotechnology research and development centre combining the latest in laboratory facilities with an excellent infrastructure. This combination of an exceptional building resource with a commercially and academically supportive company offers a unique package for biotech start-ups, R&D satellites from pharmaceutical companies and service based companies."

"The Manchester incubator building is located right in the centre of Manchester’s academic and clinical heartland; the Manchester Corridor."

"The fact that the enitre UK market is only worth £5m, tells you it's clearly not a big problem hence no other big diagnostics company has developed this product."

Sorry Dave but that is nonsense, it is a monumentally big problem for those effected with permanant hearing loss from birth, and their family. Big pharmas often snap up smaller companies like Genedrive who develop these kind of break-through life changing pharma technologies.

Actually I think Budd's action in putting the brakes on the India rise was quite a responsible thing to have done, with new investors in mind. He knew the India market wasn't looking very attractive at that time and rather then allow a herd of new investors to be spiked on news that wasn't going to result in imminent orders from Divoc (as many were expecting) he chose (or was asked to) put an RNS out to manage expectations. Sometimes I wonder where that approval news leaked from, the company obviously didn't RNS it because they felt the new India pricing rules meant that it was irrelevant.

Personally I'd rather he hadn't put the brakes on it!! But I appreciate his intentions and where he was coming from.

"So only 20% take up suggests the wider market doesn't trust DB or the BODs very much at all. "

Actually to me it just suggests that people would rather buy on the open market at the same price, without diluting existing holdings.

Within 1 year more like. There are multiple income streams here and tax credits.