Member Info for Monkshood

You will be able to get some as qualifying holders-
'the Company intends to provide all Qualifying Shareholders with the opportunity to subscribe for an aggregate of up to 4,000,000 Open Offer Shares at the Issue Price, to raise up to approximately £2.0 million (before expenses), on the basis of 1 Open Offer Share for every 38.72957975'
I do like their attitude to retail holders (which they also demonstrated in the placing last year)-
'We are also pleased to be announcing the Open Offer, again demonstrating our determination that our smaller, early stage, retail investors should continue to have the opportunity to participate in the increasing success of the Company as we mature.'

Growth through H1 in what was a tough time in US hospitals was 5%. It's OK but I was expecting it to be a couple of % higher from their AGM statement. If they keep the momentum then revenue and EDITDA will be at the top end of analysts predictions for 2021. Customer retention is very good (they had a problem with this in the previous year when they lost a large customer).
'In accordance with Craneware's revenue recognition policy, the majority of the revenue resulting from both new sales and existing contract renewal will be recognised over future periods, providing the Group with long term visibility of revenue under contract.'
So, looking good going forward.

Have you seen the delayed trades-
RK topping up or unloading?

Normally directors off loading would be a red flag but there is nothing to indicate that is the case here.
I assume the sale was either a 'life event' or a tax move to pre-empt possible tax changes in March (£40M+ should pay for a nice post covid holiday). They have kept the majority of their holdings (22% of the company) that were in a Trust. There is no dilution for existing holders.
As the placing was oversubscribed at market price on the day and closed very quickly, it would seem that II's were happy with this.

Interesting you say that Chris. I was at Guy's last week, talking to some of the staff they were saying how people who had previously had covid were having a very strong reaction to the vaccine on the first dose. I did also talk to two staff who have had both jabs and only had a sore spot where injected so it is variable.

I would not be surprised if some of the vaccines aren't tweaked by the time some of the later groups are on their second shot.
There was a study indicating that several of the more virulent variants are showing convergent evolution (same groups of mutations occurring independently) . I would be surprised if they are not already making the constructs to put these sites into any vaccines (where they are affect the RBS).
Some of the later vaccines also target other regions, so having one of these may be more advantageous. The N protein is very antigenic in some other coronavirus infections.
What will be interesting going forward is the Oxford/AZ vaccine. They used Chimp adenovirus rather than human strain as they thought it would get a better response as our bodies would already have seen the latter. Clearly once you have had this vaccine this is no longer the case. Arguably, using second different type of vaccine may be a better strategy.

Remember that Aggreko get half of the savings that they make on power. I think that it is costed in, but the savings are not as great as the originally flagged and with Gale in charge they are just starting to be more honest about their true costs.
I am however, surprised that they only reduced debt by 3M even with paying Senegal 7M.
Let me know what you number crunching throws up. I think though, that you may need to wait until the financials a the end of the month for a little more clarity.

'During the quarter Resolute paid its first dividend, US$7m, to the Government of Senegal' It seems that Mali and Senegal get far more than the shareholders ever do....

Well I was wrong on that!
I should have learnt with this by no to have just traded the rise after the Bibiani announcement and not wait for the quarterlies.
Mako production was OK. Syama a bit down on sulphides but mainly down on the oxides at as stated in the update.
It is the future cost and guidance that have really knocked it (plus, that net debt has only reduced by $3M in the last quarter) Syama costs stay around what they have been (in practice rather than guidance) with perhaps the oxide creeping up a bit. There is no obvious significant cost benefit with the new power supply coming in. The impact is mainly from the lower production and increased cost at Mako, production falls about 50k oz (which was expected) but the cost increases from $750 to $1200 which is a big jump.
Probably the only good news, is that even with the disruption, they seem to have got the sulphide circuit producing efficient now. It is long term, but is never going to be as cheap as they used to say.
It may be that they are being more realistic and upfront about costs now with JW gone, time will tell. I have been told that they will provide much needed clarity about the Mali tax situation at the end of the month.

ab&dct, cheers, it's good to have someone with such an excellent technical knowledge of Affimers on the BB.
I used to have an office near a group that specialised in crystallising membrane proteins so I know how hard they are to work with.

Understandable, although surprised it dropped as much, however I took this as a opportunity to get some more under1200.
With the lockdown in November and the store closures building through December, to get the level of revenues that they did shows the great potential for a more normal year.
Looking at covid infection levels, particularly in areas where they have had high levels for some time, coupled with the report of a reasonable level of immunity after infection and the vaccine role out I do not see them staying closed for too long.

Not sure that the people of Cornwall will appreciate being called 'dense' ....

Growing steadily in a difficult year. It looks like growth may have slowed slightly in H2 , however, net cash still increased by >2M (excluding the fund raise) so it more a case of not growing at the rate of 20% seen in H1. With the US more affected by covid in H2, and resultant problems with starting drug trails etc, this is probably not surprising.
This is still a good long term hold for me.

I think that is a great results , given the progressive lockdowns I would have been very happy with 300M revenue.
Even after the unwinding of the VAT deferral etc they will have net cash of 60M compared to a similar amount in debt this time last year.
As you note ,they have repaid the furlough monies although 'despite our classification as a non-essential retailer' indicates that they are not delighted with the change of status since Lockdwn1.
Only downside is that with them not claiming furlough they are now running at a weekly loss until the shops open again.
Once they are I can see there being a large bounce back for at least the first quarter as there will still be many restrictions in place which will limit other discretionary spending.
I wonder what the markets will make of it?

Cheers RD, you can have a A*.
I was just not sure with the Affimers targeting smaller sites than mAbs. You can get secondary structures with expressed proteins so it should be possible to target the polar domains of M. It would be a nice one to incorporate as a component in a BAMS multiplex.

Thanks ab8dct.
Do you know to what extent secondary/tertiary structure has a role in Affimer binding or is it usually just down to primary structure?
I was wondering if you could still raise Affimers to M for BAMS, using expressed proteins if folding did not matter - It seems to be a good marker in an MS study I have seen.

For anyone concerned about the cost of changing the older UK/EU units, they have until 2025-30 before they need to do this. They are looking at the best ways to reduce the potential cost of this.
As they have plenty of time, a good cash flow and lots of money in the bank it should not be too burdensome.

You do get mutations in N, the new variant has one. I can follow the logic that they may be more infrequent in N than in S1 , but I do not have the skills to interrogate the Nextstrain DB (or alternatives ) to see if this is actually the case.
Whilst on the S/N theme, it is interesting that there are so far no tests for M which has double the abundance of N, you can see it MS experiments where they have precipitated whole virions. I assume it will be more hydrophobic than S and N, is it possibly less antigenic or more conserved with other coronaviruses (so harder to select for unique binding)?
It is not even listed on SinoBiological as an expressed protein.
Any ideas?

Cheers Chengdog. I find writing on the BB useful as it make me research the topic more thoroughly than perhaps I would otherwise. It also allows people to question what is said, I am used to this coming from a science background.
I really am not that keen on the preaching by twitter that seems more normal now, it seems designed to stop critical discussion.
I don't know who coin the phrase the 'posh ramper' for a certain person but it was spot on!

Celtics, I agree with you re- the problems of comparing the LoDs for different proteins.
However, my reply was in response to the statement comparing just that.
As you point out the question mainly hinges on whether and how fully the virions are disrupted (detergents/reducing agents) prior to testing. I think that this will be a requirement for both safety reasons and to make the proteins most open for detection.
I appreciate that other factors may come into play but at the end you need a much greater sensitivity for an assay for S1 compared to N because of the numeric differences. I would not be surprised if the final LFT did incorporate Affimers for N, there has to be a good reason that every other LFT test has gone down this route.