Member Info for neilin62

Chrishutch is absolutely correct.
Consider the fact that there are only 6 trading days between the meeting on the 26th Jan, and the deadline date 7th Feb, the reason for the missed deadline is entirely due to the fact that it is physically impossible to file the necessary documents prior to 7th Feb. Shareholder approval for the proposals, submission to SEC, and their approvals, along with a requirement for contributory funds to be deposited with a 5 day notice period, means it can't happen in the available timeframe.
Note however, the extension request is not for 12 months. It is for UP TO 12 extensions of a month each.
The company may only need 2 monthly extensions to complete the transaction. Either way, it is of absolutely no concern to me as this is just an extension of our growing portfolio. Things of this magnitude take time.
To Widglide.....
I have always tried never to make e a personal attack on anyone here, (with the exception of 1 person in particular) and i intend to keep it that way, but even i have my limits with your negative attitude, so......
You made it clear previously that you hold me responsible for you buying in here. I always say that no one should ever base their decision on anything i say. If you chose to do so, that is your decision, and your responsibility.
However, and i will say the following and it is not meant in any way, shape or form to make me sound a smart ar5e, or a big shot or anything else:
I told you that BOU would de-list - IT DID
I told you that we would re-list -WE DID
I told you we would not re-list on AIM, but on the main market - WE DID
I told you that i would get the BOD to issue an RNS when i proposed a Section 303 to communicate- THEY DID
I told you we would be in the Pharma sector- WE ARE
I told you that Antos Glogowski, despite being the largest shareholder, would not be in any position- HE ISN'T
I told you we would sign agreements with manufacturers for reagents-WE DID
I told you we would sign up agreements for companion diagnostics- WE DID
I told you we would be expanding into other forms of cancer detection - WE ARE
I have posted lots of details on what i have researched
There is lots more to come. Unfortunately, it is not in the time frame you want.
Now, given the above, and again, i emphasise i am not trying to be a "i told you so smart ar5e", but whose views would i be inclined to align with? mine, or your in depth analysis that this company is crap?
I have one more line to add to the above list,,,,,,,I told you this company would be a huge success
IF i have got it wrong, then you can at least console yourself with the knowledge that my loss would be FAR,FAR larger than yours by a mile.
Despite the above, i still wish you well.
Neil
Neil

Hi Chrishutch
No, the one at 12:36 for 500,000 was mine, and another one for 500,000 at 16:33 so a delayed trade notification which will probably show at close tonight. (if not before)
Neil

Posted this last night before LSE site crashed (not my fault honest)
It looks like the MM's are short of available shares.
My order today had not been filled, so I had to split it into smaller trades.
One eventually went through at 12:36, but the other didn't execute until after hours, although it is not showing on London Stock Exchange.
There will be a further trade showing tomorrow as a late trade posted at 16:33
I am wondering if CIZ will take the opportunity since they are in the US, to extend the agreement
with Behnke Group. Great bit of business sense to engage a company and agree terms of
remuneration that will only be made upon generation of revenues that are as a result of their marketing and PR.

On the subject of Conduit and the recently announced Put Option, this is my opinion only, but I am convinced that it has already been decided that the option will be taken up, and we will be notified in due course.
Makes perfect sense to exchange a £2,080,000 deal for one valued at £3,250,000
Especially when you consider that it enters us into a new exchange, and being part of a larger entity.
Essentially we have still retained an interest in AZD1565 albeit by shares rather than royalties,
but we now have a slice of a bigger pie with regards to other products and services offered
by Conduit / Murphy. I consider that a win/win situation.

It's probably too early and a bit of wishful thinking that while they are in the US this week, that CIZ may possibly meet with our other partners regarding the commercialisation of our test, but you never know.
There is another major event taking place in May and this could possibly be perfect timing for an announcement on our test, looking at Alan's comments on timelines n his last interview.

All looking good in my opinion

Neil

WIDGLIDE
"These events don't mean nothing"
Have you forgot what you posted on 14/11/22 @13:09?
Neil

Just wanted to say to all posters here, new and old, i hope you all have a very Happy Christmas.
2 and a half days trading left of this year, and we are into 2023, which i truly believe will be the catalyst for the start of big things for us at long last.
Best wishes everyone, and be happy, safe and well.
Neil

PushThe Button
Can you please list:
1.The timelines that you say the BOD have missed
2.Mistakes or delays you seem to be suggesting the BOD have made / encountered
Allan has given a clear timeline of events by ourselves, and our partners, both in interviews and in RNS notifications, so i really can't understand your post.
Having come from the days of PSL /Bould, i am more than happy in the BOD's dissemination of news, progress etc.
Neil

Evening Jace86
I hope you don't take this the wrong way, as i am not trying to prove anyone wrong, but the good news is that the test we have NOW and are bringing to market IS the Elisa Sandwich Assay. The prototype test which proved the concept was based on Western Blot. The Elisa Assay is the development of the kit for high throughput for hospital / laboratory use.
Also, it hasn't been hinted, but has been publicly stated to the market by RNS that "new projects have been initiated to evaluate the use of CIZ1B for the detection of other cancers, which has led to an initial focus on breast cancer." , so further on than some may realise.
NathanR999, again, i am not looking for an argument or anything, but CA125 or CEA are not comparable in the slightest to CIZ's test. They are not a first point of reference for a clinical diagnosis. They are normally used following a diagnosis to determine a recurrence, or treatment response, or as an indicator if the patient is in a very high risk group.
They are not accurate, given that raised levels of CA125 or CEA can be affected by a number of other conditions, eg pregnancy, liver disease, even the menstrual cycle. Some patients that do have cancer can even display no increase in levels, and it is found that up to 50% of cases could be missed. CEA test is used to plan and monitor treatment following a positive diagnosis. i.e. when the cancer is already advanced. Our test is designed to detect cancer long before it gets to that stage.
Your comment that £100 is "misleading" ....that comment was made by the BOD, so are you saying that they have misled us?
re the valuations seen on here, yes, we do need to be careful in making calculations, as all the valuations i have seen mentioned have assumed that the uptake in China, has been stated as 30million tests p/a. That is the market size, NOT our guaranteed order level. However, those "valuations" have been made on the basis of China alone, so there is still a
very significant opportunity for us with all the other things in our pipeline, and markets.
When we listed with the IPO, at 10p, we were valued at a discounted cash flow model of an 80% discount relative to our peers, so even before any commercialisation, our share price should be MUCH higher than where we are now, but it will catch up.
In terms of the value of the company should a takeover occur, i posted some examples of what can be achieved last year, around 14th June i think.
Again, i am not looking for an argument, but just posting facts as i see them.
Neil

Not a chance of them being sold at £5
Our nearest "competitor" who's test doesn't compare to ours is selling at $949 each so £100 is a massive saving for the US medicare system. The cost factor will also speed things up over there, as they have to go through insurance companies authorising the tests, as they are classed diagnostic.
The following is an extract of an interview with Dr Aamir Ehsan (Corepath President).....
"so typically, if you see any cancer patient and look at the journey of their diagnosis, it's pretty long. A patient feels unwell and they go to the primary care doctor. The primary care doctor does certain tests, and based on certain tests, they go and talk to the oncologist. And after they talk to the oncologist, the biopsy needs to be done, or the procedure need to be done. Another appointment is made to the radiologist and the surgeons. After the tissue diagnosis is obtained, then you go to the pathologist. So, the patient is already several weeks behind, waiting very impatiently and fearful, for the diagnosis.

Pathologists make the diagnosis; it takes a few days to make the diagnosis. Then all the data are presented in a multidisciplinary tumor board conference, certain decisions are made, more testing gets ordered, and it takes another few weeks to get all these results done. So really, when the patients start having symptoms, by the time it goes to the final treatment decision, it has been several weeks or a few months that have been wasted. There are many challenges and many opportunities to improve in health care to make the rapid diagnosis for these cancer patients."
Crucially....TIME is saved which is the biggest factor in saving lives.
Cost of a CT scan starts at £450 in UK, so again £100 is a massive cost saving to NHS on a number of fronts-
1. Wasted time/resource of LDCT scans
2. Re-allocation of those resources on other patients
3. Frees up hospital beds if LDCT scans are not required as patients are ruled out by use of our test
4. Reduction in the already record high number / length of patient waiting lists
5. Actual cost savings of the kit compared to the above.

Neil

Evening LB,
Sorry for late reply, but not been home long.
Firstly your posts on our other share have been outstanding lately. Fantastic research and thought process. I don't post there as i try not to make it personal against posters, but a certain poster (sure you know who i mean) would have me breaking that in minutes!
Personally, i don't think there is any plan for any tie up between us and Accustem. They are primarily involved with the early detection of recurrence of cancer, but i could be wrong. We are firmly in the sector of detecting prevalence of cancer long before that stage.
Reading some of the posts today, i have said before, that i am sure that we will be the subject of an acquisition at some stage, but not for some time yet. There is so much in the pipeline to come to market yet, not just the commercialisation of the lung cancer test.
That would bring another opportunity to us. - we would then be in a position to commercialise licensing agreements for the supply and use of our reagents /antibodies with other manufacturers of equipment in the sector.
In the China deal, it is important to realise that although they are taking on the whole process and we get a 10% royalty on sales of our kit, we also get payment for ALL sales of products and services using CIZ1B. So we/China can sell our formulas to other potential users.
A I takes us into another dimension with data and predictive modelling of the likely hood of cancer amongst patients.
All this heading towards a simple test that eventually means we won't even need to go to a hospital for tests, giving the NHS massive cost savings, freeing up CT scans etc for other patients, which in turn reduces waiting times.
Neil

Widglide
You should show us some research for once, not just tell us that the share price is down.
You pointed out that CIZ aren't listed at the PARIS Expo.
But you also failed to point out that Professor Dawn Coverley was speaking at the Oncology and Precision Medical Conference at Alderly, last month on early detection and diagnosis.
I would bet your "research" didn't extend to that, or who else Allan Syms met with last week in US, or who has a vested interest in this sector due to their daughter having cancer?
It's okay to point one thing out, but at least balance it with some facts.
Neil

Widglide, couple of things to note:
As Jace86 says, big firms don't buy small. Your comment that the big investors are not interested is not true. For a start, most funds are unable to invest in companies until they achieve a certain MCAP. You can see this on holdings notifications where companies drop below a certain threshold, and are forced to sell their holding.
You "guarantee that we are too late to the party" - you cannot make such a guarantee, but in the same spirit of your comment, i guarantee that we are not.
"Outsourcing" seems to be an issue with you. Of course they outsource. Reagents and antibodies are a biohazard class product and have to be manufactured by clinically approved laboratories! re you suggesting that every other pharma produces these things in house?
My company manufactures certain items. One of my customers has an annual revenue of £19 BILLION. They outsource these items to me, because we are the experts in this product.
re the test, wait for news possibly as early as next week on Allan's visit to US. Corepath's involvement, possibly Behnke getting us in front of potential customers, still lots of news to come.
The test itself is one thing, with China and US, and this in my opinion is a success, and commercialisation will be notified in due course. Better than that, we have already been told that we have engaged other CRO involvement to manufacture additional antibodies etc and have moved on to "further projects"(note the plural sense) with breast cancer being the next focus, so our portfolio is growing. You don't engage other manufacturers and move into additional projects, unless you are successful in the first one.
Also, just for your info, as you know, i research the ar$e out of my investment, and one of the things i find are numerous studies into the further use of CIZ1b.
There are a number of medical citations that have found correlations of CIZ1b with, lymphomas, kidney cancer, thyroid cancer, liver cancer, colon cancer, bladder cancer, and a possible link to detection of Alzheimer's.
I know i won't change your mind on where this is going, but by the same token.... you won't change mine!
All the best
Neil

Just to clarify the TR1 question....
Holders ARE obliged to make a TR1 disclosure subject to certain thresholds being crossed.
The important number here is 10.2 million shares as that equates to 3%
Disclosure is normally 3% and then 1% increments
However, there are a small number of exemptions.-
1. A market maker - for obvious reasons, but even they are obliged to notify if their stock exceeds 9.999% of the company's share issue.
2. An investment firm / credit institution where the holding does not exceed 5%
3. Investment / Fund Managers where the holding does not exceed 5%
In the case of a company incorporated in the UK, disclosure must be made within 2 days of the event triggering the threshold breach. This clearly was not the case when Conduit sold last time, given that the TR1 was not notified for 30 days. Don't ask me how they got away with that one. !
So if they do buy or sell, we MAY or MAY NOT see a notification.
14 million shares would be below the required threshold if it is a fund/investment firm.
BUT... there are a coupe of other scenarios where we wouldn't see a TR1.
Purely as an example..... Neil, Chris, Joe, and Sally are a group of friends/colleagues that like to invest in shares.
Each of us decides company X looks like a good investment opportunity, so we each buy 3 million shares. None of us have breached the threshold, but we could be seen as "acting in concert" Our group have more than the threshold, but you will never know.
Just ask yourself who were the "placing investors" in the IPO ? Answer is, you will never know.
Now another scenario. - i have personally bought, lets say 9 million shares, so getting too close to the threshold.
I want to buy some more. My company made a profit last year, so i use the retained profits to purchase 10 million shares.
I now have 19 million shares, way above the notification threshold. BUT, my company (although i am the owner) is a separate legal entity, so the beneficial trust is the company, not ME. - so again, you will never see a TR1.
Sorry if this is boring, but it does go someway to explain why we don't always see a TR1
Neil

apologies, my fat fingers hit the wrong key, and sent half a message.......
The main case for the FTC centres around the fact that Grail / Illumina would have a monopoly on the supply of reagents to it's customers, as they are reliant on Illumina's platform only being able to use Grail (hence Illumina's) sequencing. They effectively have their customers/suppliers by the proverbials.
Now, if these customers / competition decided to use a different manufacturer of these items, think how that would open the market to us. We have already been told we are signing licencing agreements to supply our intellectual property (CIZ1B) to other manufacturers of diagnostic testing equipment, and how we are further engaging other manufacturers of the reagents required.
I believe we may see some of these disgruntled customers/competition of Grail signing up for our product.
Also in the document is a very interesting comment. In their defence, they state that neither the US or the EU should have objected to the merger, since they have "no products or services" in the Europe. So how does that align with the fact that they are conducting trials with the NHS? ( only on patients in the 50 - 77 year age group) Last time i looked, the UK was still in Europe. I am quite sure Margrethe Vestager (European Competition Commissioner) will be well aware of this claim, but i will drop her an email to be sure.
Regarding previous posts concerned about Grail being competition for us, their documents reveal that they are not looking at selective cancer detection, but, against previous concerns by professionals and investors, that they are looking at a detector kit of at LEAST 10 different cancers. So to me at least, no real threat of competition.
They do give a figure of projected revenue stream of some $50 billion being the case for cancer screening.
I also read a further study that stated that their kit only identified 38% of patients with cancer and completely missed a significant number in the trial, that went on to develop later stage cancers.
Also of note.... Illumina's stock price dropped 60% since mid 2021 due to investors getting nervous about "rival companies making significant developments" and their gene sequencing platform being so expensive.
Come on Allan, time to give us our reward.
Neil

hailow18
Thank you for the compliment.
I believe that the optimisation of the assays are complete, or aT least will be in coming days. Whether this will be notified by RNS or not, i am not sure, but it will provide the pathway clear to supply the antigens/reagents to China, if not already done so. (it's possible that we have already supplied some, to progress the kit manufacture, and the optimisation is to further advance the development of CIZ1B as a biomarker for other kits)
I have just completed reading up on the Illumina/Grail anti-trust case with the FTC in USA. This document is their defence submission to FTC in response to the case brought against them, which i previously posted about.
The document (Docket 9041 if anyone is interested) is 203 pages long, and heavily redacted, but it does contain some interesting notes.
The main case for the FTC

To all holders, especially the "old gang"....
You know my stance on making my position clear, and never being swayed by my research.
I realise that this message will come across as somewhat cryptic in it's content. I apologise for that in advance. It is not inside information, but out of respect for the individual(s) concerned, i will not reveal who, or what was communicated, other than to give the following update from me.
I have been in touch with someone VERY professional, and VERY connected with the work within NHS in the development of early cancer detection. The reason for my contact with them was to ascertain that they were aware of the development of our test kit(s).
I can confirm that yes, they are aware of us, and thanking me for highlighting it.
Do not rely on anything i may say in these posts as a basis for your investments.
But to put my money where my mouth is, the buy at 10:01 for 500,000 shares was me.
Neil

God bless Her Majesty the Queen.
Passed away this afternoon.
Neil

To follow on from my post about the recent advert, i looked a bit deeper.
What do i find?
Well, who knew that we have two new "employees"?
Number one.
No other than Bill Behnke (yes, THAT Bill Behnke) who apparently is our Senior Consultant for Business Development. Now the interesting thing here is the time-line. January 2021 to present. ........Jan 2021 suggests to me that the involvement of the Behnke Group was considered right from the outset, and certainly formed part of the plan for the IPO.
Number two.
Kelly Lewins. She is our Marketing Communications Manager engaged Feb 2022 to present. So the comments on "no marketing" taking place seem unfounded.
I will take a bet on a significant RNS either in September, or early October.
Neil

I see a position advertised for role of Research Technician to assist Dr Dawn Coverley in supporting the development of assays for CIZ1B biomarkers for test kits closed on Tuesday 30th August.
Funded from an external source.
Neil

Further....
Illumina launched an appeal in an attempt to have the investigation lifted by offering "concessions"
The EU General Court rejected the appeal and said the investigation is to continue.
The action was brought by "an unnamed third party" under Article 22 of the EUMR.
I wonder who would want to stop Illumina controlling the market? Could it be someone who has an interest in UK, EU, USA, & China? I seem to remember someone who has a long relationship with China. Just a thought....
Illumina's accounts show an accrual of $453milion in expectation of the fine being imposed by the EU.
They also show an accrual of $156million in settlement of a legal claim brought by BGI China
I know who i would rather be dealing with!
Neil

Just a few things to note.
1. Illumina's takeover of Grail has been vetoed by the FTS in US in an antitrust lawsuit. It is also the subject of international investigation by EU In 2020, Illumina was forced to abandon a takeover of Pacific Biosciences in a similar lawsuit.
2. By completing the deal in violation of FTC approval, the company risks a fine of 10% of it's entire global revenue.
3. The antitrust lawsuit is based in the fact that Illumina / Grail has competitors that rely on their provision of gene sequencing. So they could stifle competition by being the only provider.
4. Note the sentence "Aims to detect....." Ours is proved to detect!
5. Note the sentence "No results yet"
6. Illumina has no sales in EU, and is not likely to have, given the antitrust cases in Germany, Denmark, Switzerland, and Turkey.
I repeat from earlier messages.... this test is aimed specifically at the already at risk, higher age group. Our test has no pre risk requirement, or age limit.
Even IF, the NHS takes up their test, all this just goes to prove is that our test is seriously required, not least to stop one single rival company holding the world to ransom.
Neil