Member Info for lordloadsoflolly

Bang in the middle, so anyone’s guess.

Why in this day & age it’s still so difficult to flag a buy as a buy and a sell as a sell is quite beyond me.

Quite clearly a deliberate ploy to keep PIs guessing, as the LSE knows only too well which were buys & which sells.

Posts are vanity, sales sanity.

Particularly when you’re losing money & burning through cash the way LUCY is..

Wildbunch - or maybe, just maybe, Tim gave you the AGM message you wanted to hear. Cos he’s got nothing vaguely tangible to offer right now.

What if 2025 comes & goes & still no game-changing deal? Will you still be hanging by his every word then?

Just look what happened over at Incanthera. SP riding high on the cusp of a ground-breaking deal with Watsons (Hutchison Whampoa / Marionnaud). Then at the 11th hour, patent infringement claim, Marionnaud mysteriously walks (even though claim is allegedly settled in INC’s favour, but under NDA of course so no-one really knows what went on). And INC’s SP promptly loses 80% of its value, despite a previously imminent-looking deal.

Shandy - I'm sure it couldn't be double recorded.

Any more than a company's turnover could be boosted by an order that's then returned.

Wildtiger - and according to my custom-built AI tool, you're a tool - with absolutely no idea where the price is heading.

Bazzaman - all very well.

But for years now, TEK's SP has repeatedly failed to reflect any of its holdings' successes.

Because it's failed to take any money off the table at IPO stage.

It's done the precise opposite in fact, acting as the holdings' bank of last resort every time they need more cash (a frequent occurrence).

That's why there's such a high discount to NAV. Cos TEK's financial model is utterly broken & Cliff's the only real one benefitting with his huge unwarranted salary & benefits.

Great - 73p will be ample for me to buy a new sofa. Can't wait!

Mol - yes, that probably accounts for it.

Seems a highly non-commercial transaction though.

In most businesses, if you over-estimate demand & buy too much stock that’s your problem, not the supplier’s.

I know the stock was needed elsewhere, but surely the customer should have shouldered at least some of the cost for their mistake.

Thanks mol

You'd have thought Opti had secured some form of contractual agreement with Boots before telling shareholders about it.

SOH saying it's another example of a major retailer just changing their mind at a moment's notice is disingenuous. The deal clearly wasn't sewn up properly with watertight timelines.

Perhaps a question to ask at Thursday's Investor Meet Company webinar, seeing as he implies the door is still open (which I very much doubt after all this time).

Can anyone else shed light on the Boots deal?

It prompted a 23%+ SP rise the day it was announced in autumn 2023, so hard to believe its demise could be so under-reported.

Mol - I'm sure you'll know the answer to this.

Presumably it never got off the ground (despite the agreement being announced) & is dead in the water now.

But whatever really happened to that 2024 Boots deal?

https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/1027384/optibiotix-up-23-as-chemist-giant-boots-agrees-sales-deal-1027384.html

Vascular - I'd hardly call the dilution minimal.

This latest subscription raised just over £0.5m, when total market cap stands at £4.25m.

INC needs the cash because IMM ain't gonna be exercising their warrants.

Presumably Opti's new broker (announced today) is cheaper, given their latest results RNS states:

"As the Company reduces its PR, broker, and staff costs ....."

MG - yup, presumably.

Anything above £14k = negotiated order ATM (which I've never used as you don't know what price you're buying / selling at).

Most you can buy on Iweb currently is £14k worth.

Bye bye wildbunch.

Oh - and thanks so much for all YOUR “in depth research”.

Hightrack - of course nobody knows - though I’d have thought it very unlikely.

MaverickD - waiting for next week? More like waiting for Godot.

Span - only problem is, those " Directors (who) have an expectation this new Lanstead agreement will yield a net gain" are the very same twin Tims.

And they've repeatedly raised hopes previously, only to quickly dash them again.

So that Lanstead statement is about as credible as they are - i.e. not very much.

MrHumble - “Seems to be an awful lot of filtering going on here”.

Could have something to do with your sudden outbreak of unintelligible posts, which brought nothing to the party AFAIC.

Bye bye MrHumble. Filtered.