Member Info for Muck165

Personally I think AP was forced into agreeing a settlement with the Zim govt in order to get Alpha repaid before it sought to recover the security Albulescu gave it. So I think the settlement will more likely be cash (not diamonds) and so all this talk of diamond values is moot.

If I’m right and recovery is enough to cover the debt and provide some working capital (which is what I think the 23/9 RNS was referring to when talking about “alternative measures”), then that still represents a shot in the arm for the company. Only issue is the 23/9 RNS said “these arrangements will be finalised in Q4” so any time before the new year. And that assumes settlement terms are honoured.

Quite right Apre, and thanks for the reminder! Yes it’s quiet now, but we knew that was likely. Foundations are strong and strengthening.

One can hope Ant, but I think it unlikely.

Seems that way Ant. Very disappointing.

Just for clarity, but the RNS did not say a settlement had been agreed to “release” the diamonds. It said agreement had been reached in relation to the historic claim, which could mean anything. And “recovery” just means recovery of whatever has been agreed.

The panacea for a POC diagnostic is that it meets the WHO REASSURED criteria;

REal--time connectivity.

Affordable

Sensitive

Specific

User friendly

Rapid equipment free

Delivered

The downfall for LFT’s has been sensitivity and specificity. They meet all other criteria, hence the drive to improve performance. In this respect ABDX have spent loads of time over the last 24 months presenting at conferences and doing workshops (with Cytiva) on the LFT/Molecular crossover - in other words a test with all the normal benefits of an LFT but with performance characteristics akin to PCR, LAMP etc.

Some might think that’s way off, but that’s just not true. By way of example, here’s a paper from UCL back in 2021 where they developed just such a test for Covid.. I don’t understand all the scientific stuff, but I can understand the conclusion;

“ we have developed an ultrasensitive and specific multi-gene diagnostic for SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA using isothermal RPA technology, and proposed two different detection methods, both showing high accuracy. While real-time fluorescence detection developed here offers more sensitivity and faster results (10 min faster than dipstick method), the proposed detection on dipsticks appeared as the preferred method for decentralised testing. We showed this method has the potential to meet the ASSURED and REASSURED criteria; it is affordable, rapid, has high analytical sensitivity and specificity, it is user-friendly and can be performed with minimal equipment. We also proposed the addition of real-time connectivity through a smartphone application and the potential use of saliva as a non-invasive specimen”

As you can see, the “dipstick” method was preferred. Interesting then that “The PCRD FLEX dipsticks and running buffer were obtained from Abingdon Health.”

Remember, this was from over 3 years ago. Plenty of R&D since then. We often forget about our PCRD product but it’s at the very heart of a lot of innovation at the moment.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8120794/

Oh, and whilst the dipstick method was preferred, the other method used stuff provided by Axxin (that company we’ve been working with for a while to integrate PCRD into their tools.

So you can’t.

I repeat, the BP numbers were shocking. Q3 will be after mass staff terminations. I dread to think what those numbers will be.

Apologies if true. Can you point me to where it says that please.

No - the reorganisation plan was announced on 10 June. In other words, 2.5 months in to Q2.

Remember - these BP numbers relate to the period before we halved the workforce. They are shocking.

One other thing here is the current govt’s position on NHS reform, which focuses on preventing, or catching health issues early thereby saving NHS treatment (and associated wider economic) costs, and ensuring those that need treatment can get it. And alongside that is full digitisation of patient records.

Wes Streeting will, I believe, shortly be publishing a consultation on all of this.

It is the direction of travel. It’s not hard to see how cheap, accurate screening tests might fit into this new thinking particularly if results can be read electronically and immediately uploaded into centralised records.

Great for any company making those tests.

Something similar to the last link here. Again, I can’t place it in time accurately.

https://www.medica.de/vis-content/event-medcom2023.MEDICA/exh-medcom2023.2752525/MEDICA-2023-Loop-Diagnostics-S.L.-Paper-medcom2023.2752525-aylSR7heT0227eTC7o3FBA.pdf

I came across this (not seen it before). It’s not dated so I can’t accurately place it in time, although I would say it’s definitely after September 2023 (because one of the employees named in the piece didn’t start until then), and likely to be from not too long ago because some of the timeline entries match the recent website updates Ant noticed..

It’s the best thing I’ve seen setting out the clinical performance stats for Septiloop. Of other note though is that;

1) Loop seem to be saying that it has zero competitors in the space it’s targeting, being diagnosis in the emergency room.

2) It says it has Letters of Intent from 6 U.K./EU distributors. That would again tie in with the recent website update which now says it would get first initial U.K. distribution agreements in Q3 2024. I wonder if Crest might be involved…?

3) It’s had €4m of funding to get to this point.

https://radar-ppi.com/wp-content/uploads/matchmaking/pdf_presentations/65f81c5d848ac.pdf

It is a shame. They aren’t named in the accounts either, unlike Boots, Superdrug etc, so a”ditching” looks pretty certain to me.

For those who haven’t seen them ABDX have put the full accounts on their site. They’re much more detailed than what we got in the RNS so well worth a look through. Lots of things to possibly highlight, but for me everyone should look at the revenue breakdown on page 10

Roughly half our revenue is from development, with 20% manufacturing, 15% regulatory and 11% products (AST, Boots etc). EVERY area grew.

We have again seen a real spike in US business, which rose 137% year on year and now represents roughly a third of revenue. Overall there’s a shift away from Europe, no doubt because of the regulatory quagmire. Makes our US expansion a no brainer.

And then there’s this comment on page 13 when explaining ABDX thoughts on risks to revenue;

“There is a strategic plan to continue growing the contract development revenue stream through bring in more research and technical transfer stage projects. THE NUMBER AND QUALITY OF CUSTOMERS IN THIS AREA IS HIGH giving the Board sufficient confidence of achieving sales growth”. (my emphasis).

https://www.abingdonhealth.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Abingdon-Health-Group-Accounts-2024-signed.pdf

So, to follow two positive posts, here’s a not so positive one.

Salistick remains out of stock in Tesco (its been many weeks now). Yates didn’t mention them when listing partners in the IMC presentation so I strongly suspect they’ve ditched it.

Just to say these MHC Vit D tests haven’t reappeared on the Boots site, so it looks like Boots have ditched it and are just running with ours. I don’t think it’s a stretch to think that before long Boots will replace all the MHC rapid tests with own label ones supplied by us.

Am keeping an eye on the MHC iron test to see if that goes out of stock. (Boots own brand one (ie us) has been consistently outselling MHC for months, at least online).

Interesting to see that ABDX actually incorporated Abingdon Health USA Inc on 10 March, so roughly six months before we were told about it.

https://onestop.wi.gov/DFIAnnualReports/SearchBusiness

(You can see by just searching Abingdon Health Inc in the link).

Also interesting to put that in a timeline….

11/3 - Notice of Results

13/3 - Incorporates US company

14/3 - Interim results

15/3 CEO interview on Proactive about the results.

20/3 Launched Boots tests

25/3 - we’re told about FOFH

So, it’s clear US expansion has been in the plans for much longer than we thought. It does make me wonder what prompted it back in March.

Pure conjecture here but, given we’ve been told US companies prefer a US operation because it opens up more domestic grant funding options, it could have been a requirement of the FOFH acquisition, or indeed it could be we had other US companies insisting on it. If that were the case then you’d hope the company has spent the last six months lining up those customers.

TAT = TurnAround Time.

Overlaying everything is the fact that huge work is currently being applied to the performance of LFT’s, particularly their sensitivity. Imagine a health system that could obtain accurate complex results in minutes rather than wait hours for the lab? It’s best described in the conclusion to this recent piece;

“Future high-performance LFAs will allow users, such as nurses and doctors (and operators, such as lab technicians), to obtain complex analysis results at the patient’s bedside within minutes, which would otherwise only be available in the laboratory. The rise of advanced LFAs will not only save time in sending samples to central laboratories but also minimize the TAT for diagnosis and monitoring. Consequently, this will maximize the synergy between proper medical intervention by the doctor and the expected turning point for the patient.”

https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9059/12/10/2268