Member Info for Lottohopes

I think a lot of education is needed around why masks are advised, what their purpose is etc. The issue is that organisations like the WHO and govts have given public confusing messages. Saying a respiratory virus hasn’t got droplet infection as a mode of transmission, saying masks don’t work etc (in early days, maybe partly because they just didn’t have the stock needed to supply entire populations, and knew they had to ration).

Note the mask is shown effective against other viruses such as flu (influenza). There is some evidence that the flu predisposes to other respiratory infections, and it remains a killer in its own right (public have accepted it needs vaccinating seasonally and generally no outcry about this given element of choice).

So any mask that reduces risk of other viruses being transmitted is helpful. Again my opinions, the evidence is out there, but science has gotten politicised unfortunately.

Hi Ticor: the company website doesn’t mention the nano mask, so this must be either still in the pipeline, or possibly a fake article. Splendor looks like a manufacturer, so they don’t have the scientific credibility underpinning their claims.

https://splendor-tekstil.hr/en/splendor-medical-2/

In any case, the news article refers to a “nano” mask, but with no additional Cu or other element biocidal activity within the mask. Of course others will be doing what P2F is doing, maybe the same stage, but I believe there’s space for numerous companies. A nano mask is a big improvement over existing masks.

My initial thoughts on P2F was that it was similar to GyroMetric. A transfer of holding from BRH to RMS, too incestuous for my liking. Secondly the tech was via a Uni collaboration, with patents and solid IP, not much else. I was anxious about the pace at which P2F would commercialise given GyroMetric has been a disappointing journey so far, especially given how superbly disruptive its myriad tech applications are. COVID hasn’t helped things and I have no doubt there are many irons in the fire, even one of which converting into revenue will be a game changer for RMS.

However, P2F appears to be more agile, keen to capitalise on opportunity and moving apace. I imagine its not easy or natural, the transition from an academic to an entrepreneur. Interesting times. I like the sectors and the ambition here-food security, improving nutrition, medical imaging, fighting COVID in the simplest most visible manner possible.

GyroMetric tech is tailor made for a post COVID world-where people cant visit sites, expensive equipment needs monitoring actively/remotely and every efficiency imaginable needs to be squeezed. For those that survive COVID, the margins will be even tighter with little scope for down time of production, be that manufacturing industry or energy. These are my opinions only. Only ones own reading gives one conviction to hold.

Lots of companies claiming “anti viral” property of their face masks. Essentially face coverings made of one or two layers. I’ve been scanning the internet for the last few weeks, to try and find our competition. I haven’t found a like for like, that is at this stage.

If anyone can post a link to something that is 3-4 ply surgical mask type, uses nano tech and has copper particles within the fabric, please share this here, I m genuinely interested in scoping the market and the competition. Let’s not confuse this with the face coverings, of which there are dozens claiming anti viral activity. WHICH dissects a few claims here

https://www.which.co.uk/news/2020/09/do-antimicrobial-face-coverings-offer-more-protection-against-covid-19/

I have previously mentioned the advantages of a nano material (electrospun) vs the current melt blown (MB) variant.

1. Briefly, research proves that nano material for face masks, is superior in terms of filtration esp when moisture comes into picture

2. Superior in breathability (very important for shift workers who need to wear it for hours-current masks are awful-letting condensation collect on inside of mask, creating perfect conditions for further infection). The breathability is not just about comfort, nano masks allow MOISTURE to PASS through the mask easily. Anyone who has worked/lived in well heated environments like a health care home or hospital will tell you how awful it is to wear the current masks for the duration of a shift.

So the starting point for P2F is that any nano mask is definitely superior to the existing MB masks. Now we add the antiviral anti bacterial action WITHIN the mask. This reduces the risk of viable viral particles residing within the mask.

I liked the fact they have had independent certification on its efficacy from TWO labs. This tells me they are serious about the science behind their claim and open to challenge. The fact they are seeking intellectual protection (thus extending their patent cover from the nano particle production method right up to the end product), tells me they intend to commercialise via other manufacturers via licensing.

TB and NB have raised in this kind of scenario before, no doubt market is cautious. So cash position needs visiting-360k in September accounts statement. 250k raised since in warrants. If they need over 500k in cash, they must have some really big plans and I personally wouldn’t complain.

Lastly the share structure on acquisition (minus warrants) signals strong clear control of the company by its big holders (nearly 69% held by big holders). Warrants yet to be cashed, will get washed by the news flow ahead, and indeed bring in a further 350k cash.

The mask is the tip of the iceberg here. The forays into crop nutrition have huge markets such as hydroponics. Then there’s flexible electronics (working with flextronix), medical imaging etc.

And Gyrometric which was really our swan song is thrown in free at the

1509: thank you. I am no expert, but have tried to look at the science behind the claims, existing masks, ongoing research in this area.

Every company claims it’s ideas are ground breaking. Our job is to dissect the science. Gyrometric and P2F concepts are both disruptive and have superb potential. The differentiator for me is the speed with which P2F move. They are hungry for success. Even the hand gel events earlier this year are demonstrative of ambition, to me. They identify opportunities and move swiftly. There has been some inertia to overcome in Gyrometric, but I believe that too will be overcome in time. All imho only. Please DYOR

Typo-its promethean not Prometheus

https://www.prometheanparticles.co.uk/

“The worlds largest continuous multi material nano particle manufacturing plant.”

Interestingly another Nottingham Uni collaboration, so we seem to be in knowledge hub.

I was reading on nano particles and methods of production. Essentially different classifications but physical/chemical, top down/bottom up etc.. The top down methods produce inconsistent particle size and therefore unreliable performance.

What differentiates P2F from the other nano particle producers? Its patented method of making the particles.

https://uspto.report/patent/app/20180280910

Note P2F uses the “Spinning Disc Reactor” method to produce its nano material.

The recent circular issued to shareholders on proposed aquisition mentions Prometheus as our biggest competition. Prometheus uses “hydrothermal synthesis” instead. This is quoted as less efficient than P2F method.

There is literature that shows the SDR method produces the most uniform particles of true “nano” size. This allows the particle to perform as intended. In the area that we are interested in ie biocidal activity, the particle size is especially relevant. Particles of accurate-consistent size react more effectively against cell membranes and kill/inactivate bacteria/viruses.

https://cmr.asm.org/content/32/4/e00125-18

P2F aims to produce a medically certified antiviral nano mask. The masks will be electrospun. Existing masks are made from melt blown material. MB material is uncomfortable for long use, and more importantly drops in filtration efficiency, when moist.

Advantages of an Electrospun Nano mask (NM) over Melt Blown (MB) masks:

1. Better breathing comfort than MB masks: The NF filter has finer structure than MB, uniform morphology, and uniform pore diameter which allows the water vapor laden air to be passed through the filter more efficiently, with less resistance. (My guess is that more air tends to flow from gaps around the mask if the material is resistant to flow, of course “fit” is a big issue)

2. Dries faster after washing (I think the intention eventually is to produce a washable one, its what the govt hopes for)

3. More consistently effective as bacterial/viral filter than MB (filtration efficiency based on particle size vs pore size, rather than static charge) (50-100nm pore size, air particle size is 4nm, viral particle size 80-160nm, latter bigger when incorporated within saliva)

AND 2 points which are advantages of having an antiviral Nano mask:
4. Nano particles (Ag/TiO2/Zn/Cu) within the mask material, have for a long time now, been shown to demonstrate biocidal property: this could help reduce virus transmission via contact for ex

5. Disposal of USED masks is a key issue given current masks end up harbouring the virus, even if they filter them. Masks currently worn for long periods, can become virus collectors esp in health care setting. (humid air from breathing reduces filtration; creates the conditions needed for penetration of the virus/bacterium into the mask)

All in all, definite demand and market for a scientifically proven antiviral mask, indeed space for numerous such types of mask manufacturers given the scale of the demand.

The concept of masks to reduce respiratory viral/bacterial infections will remain beyond Covid. Indeed there is evidence of copper’s biocidal property against MRSA and other hospital acquired infections. The use of P2F nano tech to “treat” surfaces, other PPE such as aprons, gloves etc lies ahead. There are also filters in various situations as others have pointed out.

The main point that I m looking for, is whether they actually convert the myriad opportunities. They seem to be moving quickly. Nsitu trademark for their brand of agri products/fertilisers for example, got registered as a trade mark in March 2020. They own patents on the manufacture process of nano particles (I believe its unique) and another patent on the incorporation of the nano particles into an organic compound (to apply as fertiliser to crops). Now they are moving towards a further patent on the nano filter material. It portends a company that is focussed on opportunities and keen to commercialise. A welcome change from the geocurve-gyrometric lethargy. IMHO only. DYOR.

https://cmr.asm.org/conten

JRT: agreed. They had £360k cash position towards the end of September 2020. Add in £200k and that should cover the costs of getting P2F into production. There is a further £500k in warrants if things really take off. Essentially a delay of 4-6 weeks between now and November end (they have stated delay will be at most November end; there is a sense of purpose and urgency in the RNSs, hence I don’t believe it will be delayed that much).

TLM: interesting questions, I don’t have any comparisons per se. Any purported new tech, we need to examine existing competition, why/how the new tech is superior, and what would make buyers of the tech MIGRATE from existing tech to the new one?
So taking condition monitoring systems: I looked at current CMS, I’ve posted extensively on this before. To summarise: current tech is mostly variants of vibration monitoring. This includes all power turbines, manufacturing etc. The leader in turbine monitoring is Gram Juhls which is I think in the 50-100m turnover category.

The wind turbine fleets in the UK are relatively young. In many older farms, productivity is barely 50%. Subsidies will disappear if they haven’t already. Once existing turbines start getting older, costs of maintenance, running most productively will come into the picture. And with good CMS which is pro-active (rather than reactive), huge savings can be demonstrated (there are studies modelling savings say over 5-10 years). So it’s a case of demonstrating that Gyrometric tech works better and more importantly works DIFFERENTLY. Take that into each application: tug boats, cruise liners, automobiles, manufacturing lines, nuclear, oil rigs/pumps, distributed energy.....you get the picture. In distributed energy for ex: look at existing CMS: Clarke energy for ex is about emails sent to the engg team about parameters. Our tech is live, can be monitored remotely, wirelessly; more importantly the tech can INTERVENE by cutting power, changing gears within microseconds etc. Comparing a disruptive new comer with existing tech is a bit like comparing an iPhone with a Nokia ten years ago. All my opinions only. DYOR

Rooky: the team at Pharm2Farm is a seasoned one, with a decade plus of published research and lab experience behind them, ie unlikely to make rookie mistakes.

https://www.ntu.ac.uk/staff-profiles/science-technology/gareth-cave

I imagine the study on antiviral activity is taking place at the Uni lab. The company however, is set up in office-lab space at Biocity, Nottingham. BioCity is a Nottingham Uni and NTU owned, ambitious business incubator concept, founded in 2002. The ethos at BioCity appears to be collaborative and being able to tap into the brain power available nationally. The result is that companies set up at BioCity tend to succeed.

https://t.co/mGerKJNcie?amp=1

Hi Ticor: this is my interpretation-the testing is delayed because it simply cant take place until after the inspection. (In other words the HSE has updated its guidance on inspecting labs/facilities working with the virus, sounds like a routine inspection but until the paper work is signed off, its not done). Once the HSE signs off the facility, the testing can carry on.

P2F is looking at a just-in-case PLAN B ie a different lab for its testing, given we cannot be sure how long HSE will take to complete its inspection.

So the “problem” is the delay in testing because our University lab needs to pass a routine inspection. The RNS is worded in a rather convoluted manner, and the timing too rather odd. Some cynics even suspected it had the intention of facilitating a change of hands of shares. Who knows-this is AIM. Sentiment is fickle and hence share price is fickle, the main thing to do is keep reading and follow ones own research and instinct.

TLM: I think the patent application pending will not delay the process of commencing mask production. But the fact they are going for a patent shows clear intention imo.

Respirators are sometimes nicknamed “the selfish mask”. Because they have a filter that is unidirectional in function. It filters ONLY INCOMING air. So it’s design is to protect the wearer and tended to be worn by health care workers, industrial workers etc. The issue is the air blown OUT, is generally NOT filtered, it just gets out.

In all settings, the mask wearer may also be infected but asymptomatic. And he/she breathes out freely spreading germs. So respirator masks with these valves are not the first choice in a health care setting or indeed any setting imho. If the valve does try to filter exhaled air, it’s incredibly humid on the inside and will likely lead to leakage from the sides.

So the solution is a more breathable lighter mask, made of material that filters better than the currently dominant melt blown fibres. Masks are just beginning to be engineered and the existing ones are inadequate for long term use. All opinions only. Dyor

https://gramjuhl.com/case-story-siemens-gamesa/

Denmark is the capital as far as condition monitoring of turbines is concerned. Siemens facility collects data from over 11,000 turbines worldwide. As data accumulates, patterns get easier to detect. BUT the condition monitoring system predominantly used at the moment is vibration based. (Danish Gram Juhls leads and supplies Siemens for ex). I think gyrometric tech is ground breaking and completely different. If gyrometric can get a toe hold via this trial, there is an opportunity for the UK to usurp this domination. Note that ORE has been supporting numerous SMEs within the UK to be part of the UK supply chain (including supporting the gyrometric trial at its facility in Blythe). The recent announcement to increase wind sector contribution towards overall UK needs, is a huge impetus going forwards.

Today’s RNS states the trial is with an offshore turbine manufacturer-has to be one of three giants-MHI Vestas, Siemens or GE. GE has invested millions and is heavily associated with the ORE facility hence my guess it would be on them.

Note that P2F are applying for a patent for the nano material, and sees applications in ALL PPE ie masks, gloves, aprons; filters in various settings (air filtration etc). Huge application areas. All above opinions only. DYOR.

On the topic of funding the mask machine, I imagine it’s paid for via BRH, or we wouldn’t be hearing it’s on it’s way. RMS had 360k three weeks ago, there are 140m warrants at .5p which can fetch £700k, so I don’t see any funding issues. Again my opinions only. Please follow your own reading

1509: BRH and RMS were considered related parties during the P2F proposed transaction. Hence the share swapping from personal holding into BRH company holding. I see BRH giving a chunk of P2F away to RMS (in exchange for a bigger slice of RMS) as a clear signal that growth within RMS will be not just via P2F but through the other 2 entities ie Cloudveil and Gyrometric. I maintain that GyroMetric is as exciting as P2F. It’s ground breaking tech and the myriad application areas need to be appreciated by investors. So far imho the company itself has not done much to share this vision with investors. Even a PowerPoint presentation highlighting different sectors/industries it would find use in, would stimulate interest. Until then, only ones own research will point to potential. Detractors would point to absence of any revenue ie conversion of these opportunities. Let’s see where it goes. Covid should encourage companies towards unmanned monitoring and more importantly unmanned intervention. All above my opinions only.

Key points in interest of balance. RMS Accounts statement sept 2020: “As at 21 September 2020, the group had cash and cash equivalents totalling £360,201.” No loans as far as I m aware of (previous loans were to fund geocurve machinery)

News flow:
Early April 2020 first mention of the mask being developed via twitter.
June 2020: UKRI Innovate funding for Nanotech enabled face mask jointly developed by Pharm2farm and Flextronix.
Mid August tweet: “Our Anti-viral Face Mask project is on track. Evaluation of our latest prototype on Scanning Electron Microscopy and Energy Dispersive X-ray show the desired material and element structure. Two more steps and we are good to go. Watch this space....”
Further tweets September including the now infamous deleted one.

RMS Sept accounts: Covid mask: “Proof of concept and the design of a prototype is currently underway and expected to be completed IMMINENTLY.”

On GyroMetric section: Gyrometric continues to develop products and is CLOSE TO reaching a MILESTONE on a product with significant market potential.
On Cloudveil section: “Cloudveil is now BIDDING to provide a security testing programme to one of the largest public sector institutions in the UK financial services sector.”

September 18th BRH RNS: “P2F has developed a second defensive layer that incorporates its own nanotechnology, which is engineered to kill viruses AND bacteria. Combining this new active layer with the physical barrier layer, to produce four layer (ply) masks, is expected to improve user safety over a PROLONGED use. This new material is currently undergoing testing, specifically, with respect to the time taken to kill viruses, including COVID-19. These tests are being undertaken at the University of Nottingham and results are expected by the beginning of October.”

In summary the mask is a medical device type mask, which will need to be certified. Certification processes are being expedited in general, given COVID context and perceived urgency
https://www.cemarkingassociation.co.uk/ce-marking-covid-19-update/

There are many gimmicky masks that claim to be “antiviral”. These are not health claim products, given they cannot evidence that they protect the wearers from infection. Indeed most have disclaimers. They merely claim that the antiviral coating kills viruses/bacteria that reside there. In other words, the fabric filter is ineffective and lets infection cross in either direction. The proposed nanomask by P2F intends to have a layer added to standard FFP3 structure. This layer will inactivate most viruses/bacteria. Advantages will be breathability/comfort, longer use, clear antiviral action.

Masks are either PPE or MD (medical device type) depending on whether they protect wearer or public. I imagine our mask will do both, so, the route to pursue is medical device certification ie EN14683

http://www.hpra.ie/homepage/medical-devices/covid-19-updates/regulation-of-face-masks-and-gloves#

Opinions onl

The “model” pursued has always been low cost base, and disruptive tech that has IP protection, and which can be scaled by way of licensing/adoption by bigger players. In GyroMetric this includes global wind turbine manufacturers like MHI/Siemens (only these 2 supply UK afaik), distributed energy (Clarke Energy), manufacturing (Tarmac etc). The latest torsional vibration monitoring has applications in automobile industry. Gyrometric kit is already sold via Turkish co Gani and German couplings giant Vulcan. Covid disrupted trials of its tech, won’t be delayed forever.

Similarly, P2F aims to use its nano tech in agri applications, and I believe is in talks with big companies, to outsource its tech. The mask element will be a nano membrane which again can be used by bigger cos. Cloudveil similarly is trying to get its app and tech used by clients of bigger firms like Axis security (85m turnover). Recurring revenue from bigger players, is the model pursued, and the reason I have held patiently. Please dyor.