Member Info for Merchantbanker

Yes reading this i think that IPO first. If they were offering up 80% i'd say MHRA first. Keeping more of the company you want the price to push up after listing, giving most of it away on listing you wasn't the price pushed up before listing.

If Abingdon IPO rumoured to be at 100m is true, not surprising we are being held here. However, i think as IPO's go Abingdon could well move quite quickly north. If they are giving up only 20% equity in the IPO, shares in public hands will be low, and the 20% dilution for vast capacity expansion would be worth the return. So it's a bit like our discounted placing price. MHRA approval soon after IPO could move Abingdon north very quickly, and ODX too.

However i'm not sure it's fair to value them at the same. UK RTC is only 20% of ODX business after all. ODX have profitable food tolerance and CD4 testing, and they have the Mologic lateral flow tests.

ODX turned over 5x as much as Abingdon in last set of published accounts with Abandon losing circa £1.5m, ODX making a profit. Abingdon balance sheet net asset value £1.5m vs ODX £18m. SO just because Abingdon are the lead in the consortium, do not assume they are a bigger company. The relative performance of the two going forward will be driven by product portfolio and manufacturing capacity.

Not fair to give CIGA all the credit. This is a consortium. They cant all go off doing their own thing. This is a combined effort.

Although more not in such clear methods. A strong marketing piece for the test.

But we've already been told this but people choose not to believe it based on the share price and the fact some idiotic derampers told you otherwise.
ODX have been telling you.

UK RTC cannot produce enough UK RTC tests. Pfizer/Astra high level of interest.

Mologic/ODX cannot produce enough antigen tests. Gates interest/UK Gov interest.

There absolutely has to be a big pharma taking on the best tests in order to get the quantities required. They have to be sniffing around.

TWatcher i doubt 1 company can satisfy the demand alone. Something has to happen to increase production of whichever tests are chosen.

Note Pfizer involvement with LTSM with Mologic's trials.
Note Bill Gates influence and grants for both Mologic and Pfizer.

I wouldn't be surprised if someone like Pfizer are the answer to taking the tests mass scale, and once a product like Mologic's is approved they could quickly and aggressive build a diagnostics arm through cheap acquisitions and aggressive investment. The premature vaccine announcement would do them no harm in achieving this.

https://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2020/11/09/does-bill-gates-own-pfizer/

If the employees are clever, exercising the options at this price and transferring into a tax wrapper such as an ISA or pension would be very beneficial. You have to pay CGT on share save schemes and other options. So the price being down 50% could create an opportunity to save a large amount of CGT and getting them into a tax wrapper before they shoot up again.

So people asking why would employees sell on a 50% drop if they still believe in the company - this is why, it has a very beneficial reason and could save them thousands of pounds in cgt. So this drop is a big opportunity for employees to save a lot of tax. So the acceleration of exercising options is more likely a rush to move into tax wrappers rather than a rush for the exit.

https://www.jameshambro.com/insight/comment/sharesave-schemes/

Hi Okehurst,
We should start to see the benefits of the hedged product portfolio for sure.
People are expecting these kind of numbers to already be happening now, expecting the sales window is closing. But they are wrong as lateral flows are still pre market.
I think they can make £25-£30m profit just in H2 ending 30 March and this is before reaching full capacity and assuming 300k tests to 31 dec and 500k jan-mar.
It is so undervalued and the risk events are really offset in a number of ways.
One very important thing is the recent comment about saliva test being problematic, so again i'm very happy that Mologic have two shots at this with swab and saliva.
Confirmation of antigen test, MHRA approval and confirmation the capacity increase is going to plan, yes agree £500m profit over 24 months is on the cards and testing volumes will likely continue into 2023-25.

Global pandemic, testing shortage, 3 high quality tests, management increasing capacity 20-25 fold ...... you can't get any more confidence than that.

People are getting this wrong thinking testing will be done come spring and the sales window is closing. Couldn't be more wrong. Testing will be needed for years. Next year will be the year of the lateral flow test

Forget the chart. Look at the market cap vs the estimated profits based on capacity. That is the only reason you need to buy.

We have had a right **** storm this last 2 weeks, with lateral flow tests about to explode when we come out of lockdown we may well have a perfect storm

We haven't even seen the birth of antibody test kits yet.

Vaccine opens up immunity passports.
There will be a market for screening whether a person has antibodies before administering a vaccine
There will be a market for testing whether said vaccine successfully produces an immune response
There will be a market for those that don't want the vaccine desperate for a positive antibody test

There will be a good 5 years of sales at our minimum 200k per week in my opinion

Abingdon IPO will be interesting. What will they be valued at? Surely they are not going to list just before MHRA approval and a large government contract. Surely it comes after?

Nobody has been mislead regarding home use. The test is for home use, the comment they made in the press release yesterday was regarding the use of the 1m government order.

This is the key for me..... Mologic having two stabs at the antigen test with swab or saliva. Based on Jon Sell's recent interview i don't expect a saliva test anytime soon. He also mentions the interviewer having a test in his possession which he cannot talk about due to an embargo. It cannot be Innova's. Whosoever it is it is proof they have embargos preventing transparency of progress of certain tests.

" This test determines the concentration of COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) antigens in a saliva or swab extract sample to identify an individual with an infection."

From about 03:00 onwards

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p08y1k2j

There is no author declared on the guardian article so we cant confirm who wrote it but we can see a group of people working together for a cause.

Fact is the way the BMJ report assesses the UK RTC test is like assessing a pregnancy based on it's ability to find out if a woman has had children when clearly we all know it's designed to inform an active pregnancy.

It is crazy these attention seekers that are trying to police something where they have no authority to do so whilst revealing their complete lack of understanding and expertise in the subjects that they are critically try to appraise.

Just had another look at the application for judicial review:

Ground 1 - Gov published a policy earlier in year year relating to urgent covid procurement.
Ground 2 - Sounds like gap filling need to pad it out
Ground 3 - Disproportionate - The subsequent multi hundred million dollar tenders that have been issued suggest otherwise
Ground 4a and my favourite - Accuracy of tests do not comply with government own product profile - well i think that has been pood on today
Ground 4d and my favourite - Decision to deploy for home testing without regard to relevant considerations - it hasn't been deployed for home testing
Ground 5 - Bias due to establishing the UK RTC.

Using Jon Deeks as evidence suggesting the validation is bias based on JD claim the test is supposed to check for past infection, rather than what it is actually designed and validated to do, detect antibodies.

What a waste of time and money. This isn't going anywhere. It is clear that there is a personal vendetta against this particular award of antibody tests to the UK RTC.

Sorry over a 60% drop on nothing. No reason this shouldn't have held the 1.20 on first gov order.

I think that comment was intended to say the tests are not being used for any other reason than what they have currently been approved to be used for.

Here's the PHE assessment of the Euroimmum IgG test BMJ refer to in their report. Sensitivity is 72% but they are happy to use it to critique UK RTC test. Glad the UK RTC didn't concur.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/893433/Evaluation_of_Euroimmun_SARS_CoV_2_ELISA_IgG__1_.pdf
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-laboratory-evaluations-of-serological-assays

Exactly - you awarded a contract to a consortium that you were involved in from the start and invested money in helping develop it in association with one of your world leading scientific universities and experts? Surely it would be more of an outrage for them to award the contract to someone else.