Member Info for JimiHendrix

Very high salaries for a loss making company. Plus the ex CEOs were paid full salaries long after they’d left the company. Is that standard practice? Seems odd practice for a company regularly talking about not getting the financial backing and support it needs.

I think the Saudi pilot should result in a decent order, however the pilot length is bound to be at least 12 months so am not expecting much revenue from there until the end of 2026, just my opinion though, there's a chance the pilot length is shorter but no detail has been given.

So under reasonable assumptions (say the price paid was 1.5–5p for that early chunk before crossing the initial threshold), Mr N's true average is now likely somewhere in the 0.6–1.0p band.

I have been through the TR1s, and most of his shares were actually bought after the big crash.

Roughly speaking, given Mr Nugent's total of 165m shares and the approximate share prices when thresholds were crossed:

– Before hitting that initial 3% threshold in July he likely had about 20m shares (bought at a high price, over 1.5p).

– Then by 1st Sep he had a total of 65m, this additional +40m would have been bought between 0.7–1.5p

– Then early October another +40m mostly bought below 0.25p

– A further +20m in October around 0.25p

– Then another +30m (threshold crossed on 9th Oct) at between 0.23–0.5p

– Final push at the end of Oct for another +10m at 0.34–0.77p

So from that we can safely say that well over half of Mr N's shares were purchased below 0.5p, possibly lower.

Yes but the current price is already about 4x the price DN was loading up at. So even a placing at 0.5 may still look an attractive option for securing the longer term funding. Also if the Allenby clients are going to be involved, they will still expect a decent discount… unlikely as low as 0.25, but lower than where we are currently.

Yes but it’ll be part of a large discounted placing for sure, I imagine before the FDA submission as they’ll need extra funds for that, which is why it has been pushed back. So possibly Q2 2026.

So it sounds like DN will be paid back in equity as part of the longer term fundraiser coming in 2026.

I would imagine the other shareholders being approached are the Allenby clients who took part in the first placing a few months ago and who had been expecting to take part in the larger fundraise that was rejected.

Gloria, FY25 is July 2024 to the end of June 2025.

Regarding FDA, the company said Q4 FY26 instead of early 2026, that’s ’financial year’ which means between April – June (instead of early calendar year which would have been Jan – March).

So it’s only a few months later than they previously planned.

FDA submission pushed back to Q4.

Eureka, that was all based on what we were told would happen. For example the Dr running the CYP2C19 webinar back around March confirmed, when asked about timescales, that the implementation guide was expected to be published April/May.

As already pointed out by Nissan, Gino also expected around then and said so in his June presentation. Even NICE had the expected publish date listed on the website as April.

The research was a lot more optimistic back then, hence so were my thoughts and comments.

I use several sources for research, as much as I can find really to help build a picture of various scenarios of various likelihood. I always made it clear that those details around the implementation guide and toolkit were based on what has happened previously, it wasn’t guaranteed, but it was important to factor it in for me anyway, as it was basically the best info available to predict what could happen without having insider information. Of course one can always just wait and see, but then the risk is missing the opportunity to buy in before the action begins.

Lol that was what the premium ChatGPT models thought would likely happen, but they've all proven to be big liars since.

Seriously though, all that stuff was based on what happened with previous NHS pilots and implementation guides, so it was a reasonable expectation.

It’s usually around now, last week of November or first week of December.

The earliest we’ll see national commissioning for stroke marker testing will be April, this will be lab based. However I think it’s likely at that point (when it becomes standard procedure) there will be pressure on the HASU’s to adopt POC testing.

On my mind at the moment is the fact that before the £3m placing was voted out they anticipated a further fundraise being necessary Q2/Q3 next year. Now, assuming we receive the £1m loan it brings the need for that fundraise much closer, hopefully they’ve not had to scale back manufacturing and plans. How much was the FDA submission expected to cost? (For CYP2C19). Looking forward to hearing more in the results.

Not until long term funding is sorted. There will I imagine, be more clarity on the funding situation in the final results due very soon.

I think earliest realistic commissioning window...

Because the Test Directory is updated annually in/around April, the next realistic slot is April 2026:

• Pilot data complete.

• Implementation guide published (now).

• Time for NHSE’s pharmacogenomics working group + Genomics CRG to run the impact assessment and push a recommendation into the annual update cycle.

So, if things move smoothly, I’m expecting:

Base case: CYP2C19 lab testing for DG59 added to the National Genomic Test Directory in the April 2026 update (i.e. national commissioning from FY 26/27).

Yes, I was hoping for a specific turnaround target to be set for HASUs, but it's a bit loose ...telling centres to reflect on whether lab TAT will fit their workflow. Question now for me is whether cash-strapped HASUs will wait until lab testing gets nationally commissioned before feeling real pressure to adopt the POC.

If enough people report the trolling comment, they’ll remove it.