Member Info for neilin62

Techtonic,

I can agree with you on some of your post, but i don't agree BIO are holding all the cards. Yes there may be amendments, clauses etc. as there always are in any agreement. - BUT -

Look at it from the other side of the coin.

It could be argued that CIZ hold all the cards. Why? Because without CIZ's technology, involvement, etc. BIO is nothing. The company was set up specifically as a vehicle to get our product to market. If Bill Behnke didn't see that there is a huge potential here, he could have simply carried on with the agreement that he was responsible for the marketing of the test and only being paid on a sales results basis, which is what his original agreement with CIZ was. So something significant has made him think he wants more than a salesman's job, and why his group are already developing further relationships.

and, why would BIO support CIZ in further work in UK?

Neil

FF

I would think so at some point yes.

Once the test is in the market, then we take the royalties from any sales generated, but also on the sales of the Mabs/reagents supplied in the course of China deal. when that gets into production.(Not sure how the resultant sales of the Mabs / reagents would affect any other income from USA as the structure of the deal has changed given BIO's involvement)

Important to note though, that the BIO MOU only covers North America/Canada. That leaves an awful lot of other markets to exploit, either directly, or via licensing deals.

BOD on minimum salaries, taking shares instead of pay rises, are good indicators to me, so once we gain traction with the initial kit, this should become a self funding model. Obviously i don't know what other projects the BOD have in the pipeline, (apart from the ones iv'e mentioned previously, and the LFT, ) but at this point, i can't see a requirement for further dilution (small as it has been so far to be fair) unless the BOD have something else up their sleeve and require funding for something outside of the core business, but even then, this would/should be a further revenue stream.

Neil

FF

Should more than cover our cash burn since BIO will pick up the bill for development/clinical trial etc, so taht saveus in teh region of 500k.

Also, there are the proceeds of the placing to take into account - (circa 600k after fees., )

Neil

FF

In my opinion, you are wrong.

look at any other MOU's we have signed. None of them state that the other party(s) have signed,

Examples:

RNS 22/06/23

RNS 03/02/22

RNS 23/11/22

As has been pointed out, you can only sign an agreement / MOU / HOT, etc with a least one third party.

By default then, BIO have signed, being the third party. It may be more than one party, as Corepath are part of the consortium., depending on how BIO structures the company.

Also, if you read the last 3 lines of your post a couple of times, you will see that you have kind o answered your own question.

Neil

Fastfood,

I have no desire to turn this bb into a slanging match, so i will respond to your post, and hope we can draw a line under it and get back to genuine posting for the benefit of all.

Your comment was disingenuous to say the least.

I did NOT say that the NHS would want it inside a 2 year timeline. I very clearly said i EXPECT this to be a lot sooner than 2 years. I have the same control over times frame as you. - NONE.

Yes, i did expect it to be sooner, as i think most would freely admit they did, but given we may have been behind schedule, and i think i remember in a publication some mention of the pandemic having an effect, then this would reasonably be a factor, but not an excuse.

With regard to NHS, this is a class IIb IVD device.

It requires registration with MHRA. This can only take place AFTER it has been certified by a UK certified body (UKCA now, following Brexit)

It cannot be certified yet, as it has not been validated as a test kit. Hence there is nothing for the NHS to be able to use.

That is exactly the reason that it being developed via Corepath in USA. They are a CLIA accredited laboratory that can do all the validation, and provide all the regulatory requirements under an LDT.

An LDT is the quickest route to get our test commercialised.

That is EXACTLY the process that the Galleri test has gone through.

The above is also why China can't be progressed to commercialisation yet. The reagents/Mabs are the ones CIZ will provide to the China partners when they have been validated.

Neil

Yes i did become very vocal around the RTO - because YOU, me, and many other holders from Photonstar days were on the verge of losing all our investment when it went tits up, but unlike you, i decided to do something about it and challenged the BOD of what became Bould Opportunities. I did not convince anyone to pass the motion. If they voted, for, that was their decision, but i stand by the message that if we hadn't RTO'd, then we had definitely all lost our money.

'Not a single bit of anger towards the BOD'

Why would i be angry at the BOD? They didn't shaft us. The BOD of Photonstar did that.

"Does seem strange that his research is very well put together"

DUH!!!

Yes, because i do my fecking homework!

China - I repeat, i believe China can't happen without the validated Mabs/reagents.

'Trying to keep order among the ranks'

Ha Ha, I'm flattered that you actually believe i have such influence.

Neil

Wow,

Widglide i don'r remember making any prediction on the share price, but if you have found any, please post them and i will apologise to all.

What i do remember is saying that i believed a number of events may coincide around Sept? and that i expected some significant news. Well teaming up with Bio-Techne seemed pretty significant to me. i Think the question was "IS IT POSSIBLE we we will get an RNS...." No mention of a share price.

Again, my comment about RNS's by end of March, i don't remember making a share price prediction, but if you can post it, i will apologise. What i think i said , was i don't like putting timescales on things because it doesn't suit someones timescales. And up you pop.

However, looking back i was 2 days out when we received the RNS about the MOU with BIO. so again, pretty significant i think.

Fastfood,

How many times? I AM NOT AN INSIDER! and you will be hearing more from me, as i've no reason not to post for those that want to read.

What promises did i make in 2021 page 14? i can't see any?

Show me any indication of proof that NHS is not interested. I know for certain they are!

Lifestyle company?

Do you think Dawn Coverley has been planning a lifestyle company for 20 years?

Or Corepath are part of a conspiracy? Or Bill Behnke? Or Bio-Techne?

Couple of paragraphs from the RNS to ponder over-

CIZ -

"The company is now focused on FINALISING BINDING LEGAL DOCUMENTATION with BIO........" Note - 'FINALISING'

Bill Behnke-

"Our investor group (so he already has the investors, and doesn't need to find funding) sees this as an important opportunity to make a major difference to lung cancer survival rates, and WE HAVE ALREADY MADE PROGRESS IN DEVELOPING FURTHER RELATIONSHIPS WITH MAJOR CANCER HOSPITALS AS WE SEEK ENDORSEMENT FROM CLINICIANS AND KEY OPINION LEADERS"

Does that sound like the MOU will be signed to you?

Neil

Techtonic

Sorry, you posted while i was still typing!

I can't see how you disagree with me regarding the RNS'ing of the $100k .

I didn't make a statement either way, I just pointed out that we both had different opinion as to whether it was, or was nit material.

Anyway, lets not fall out, we all in this for the same reason.

Neil

PS

The science HAS been proven.

We have already conducted many clinical trials on the prototype test.

We are now scaling up to commercial quantities that need to be validated against those previous trials, to confirm the scalability when used in a high throughput platform.

Neil

Techtonic,

Iv'e said before it's a shame that posts cant' be edited as it would be so much easier to respond to each line, so i'll try this

1. I have repeatedly told you i am not an insider, so please don't make untrue statements when you do not know it as fact.

2. I have explained (although there was no requirement to do so) my position regarding the question of the placing.

3. If you think my posting on here is compromised, then that is your opinion.

4. Who is to say that a deal with Biotechne is or is not happening? I don't know or certain either way. And to me, the cancellation o the E3 funding was obvious.

5. I have repeatedly told everyone on here that i post what i know/hear/am told/research, so that we are all in the same boat.

That is why i declined the request to join the telegram group. Because i wanted everyone to see what i post, not just a select few.

6. The issue over whether the receipt of the $100k is material or not, is not my decision. I have previously had a disagreement with the co. as to a financial issue that i discovered, which i thought was material, and required notification. The board's opinion was that it was not material "in context" so i can't advise whether it is or it isn't, as my views aren't the same as the bod.

7. We do not have a 2 tier message board - at least not as far as i am concerned. -

Anything that i find, that i think may be of use to anyone on here, i will post. Some may like, some may not, but it is there for ALL to see and make their own judgement.

For what it is worth, i THINK that too much is being made of the fact that the co. have not notified YET whether the money has been received, and questions as to if it will even happen. The RNS is quite clear. "BIO IS PAYING ....."

It does not say that the BOD will CONFIRM payment within 30 days.

Neil

Techtionic,

I couldn't possibly answer that question could i?

If i confirmed that money was received, then that would indicate hat i am an insider, and by posting such information, i would clearly be in breach of MAR,

As per a previous post i made.... According to the information i was given, I understand that the company will announce receipt of the $100k.

If anyone has received a message contrary to that, then there is nothing i can do about it apart from request an explanation as to why.

Neil

The $100k may already be in the bank. Ciz do not have to advise immediately on receipt, just at some point that it has been received.

Investors are not holding for a day or two's interest. Probably spent more than that on a decent meal.

Not waiting on results before investing either. The MOU was for the upfront, non - refundable payment fee for the right to have an exclusivity period in which to complete the legal paperwork required to convert an understanding into a full, legally binding contract.

Techtonic, sorry if you thought i ignored you. I preferred not to confirm or deny your question, purely for the reason that i don't think it is right to reveal my position, as it may sway opinion one way or the other if i am contributing to this board.

I will say that you were previously aware that i held a substantial holding. It has NOT reduced.

I will say that i was in a position to fund, in it's entirety, one of previous placings, which the company was aware.

I will re-iterate NO ONE should base their investment on my comments/opinions/investment decisions. You need to be confident/comfortable with your own position, and what you have researched.

You are all too well aware of how your sentiment can change significantly on an event, comment, or perception of a situation at any particular time.

I was given a bit of stick a couple of weeks ago by a poster for suggesting that some of the placing monies that are not now required for the initial purposes, would now be directed towards furthering the development of our other cancer detection tests.

Then up pops news that we have SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED an antibody development program with a French pharmaceutical CRO.

Remember, work is being carried out on breast cancer detection test, and is continuing on the development of a LFT.

We are NOT a one trick pony!

Neil

Jace / LB,

Nominee account (s)

I posted the following around 31/05/23 when i queried his disappearance from the significant holders list.

Shareholders are responsible for providing TR!'s when their holding meets the requirements.

The significant shareholder page on the website reflects the shareholder register.i.e. the legal owners of the shares, including nominees. TR!'s are different in that they reflect beneficial ownership, or more accurately, control of voting rights.

We can only go on the register itself in listing the significant shareholders, unless we are 100% sure of the relevant nominee position. To do anything different, would include double counting .

For example, with Mr Miller, we don't know which different nominees he holds his shares in.

Neil

I understand that receipt of the $100k fee will be announced by the co.

I have also noted that the increase in shares in issue following the placing means that some holders may drop below the incremental 1% thresholds, which should trigger TR1 report.

At present the company have received no notices from affected holders, but as soon as the registrar issues the updated scheduled register to the company, the website should be updated to reflect any changes if any.

Neil

Evening LB great to hear from you again.

Thanks for the reply. That is exactly the way i saw it, but wanted to see if anyone else perceived it that way.

As your reply, my thoughts were that maybe they wanted to keep the investment more "in house" with existing investors. The "new investors" could possibly be already known/connected in some way, which would go someway (in my mind at least) to keeping more close ties, rather than just an investment fund.

Either way, they clearly, saw or were aware of something that gave them the confidence to invest. Particularly as the placing was not underwritten - they didn't require an underwriter, as they already knew they had takers for the shares.

I agree, i think the cancellation of E3 will take place, because if MOU is converted to binding contract, then by the end of July - only 3 months away - we will have just under $1million ( save for expenses) so no need at this stage for further funding. Coupled with that is the reduction in costs of approx half a million $ with BIO picking up the bill for the development/accreditation /manufacture etc, i think we are in a really good position.

Neil

I have a question for those that are not happy with the cancelling of the E3 funding -

Apart from the obvious issue about the BOD not giving us any reason, or other information regarding this, what is it that you are not happy about?

Genuine question, as i would be interested to know people's perception and / or concerns of the placing.

Neil

LSE updated this morning

shares in issue 396.39 m confirms placing completed, as techtonic/greend100 posts

Neil

Evening Techtonic.

The reference to AXBD was a response to Bufflehead's earlier post.

Oakp20

Can you explain how i can possibly be pumping a share when i have repeatedly said i am here long term and not interested

in the day to day share price?

In the same spirit as your request to Techtonic to provide a link, can you also provide the link to support your claim that "amateur placing forced on them because the agreed finance with e3 fund wasn't forthcoming!?

Re the placing: we will know for sure in 7 days if the placing completed. On that basis, can you tell us where YOU think the funds will be used?

Re the company being Bill Benke's house, so what? Look at Companies House to see how many companies registered office is a private residence, or a single office in a complex, or even just a PO box. It is simply a requirement where legal documents can be served.

Re the HNW's: Do you not believe the bod have performed their due diligence into whether they are legit?

Allan's comment -"absolutely delighted to have FINALLY got this agreement together, something we have been negotiating for a while"

RE "Neil, why was BIO needed...."

Dead simple - in the same way that my customers structure a deal with my company. They don't want the hassle of going to supplier A for this part, supplier B for this part, supplier C for the design, supplier D for testing.

In return for me bringing all these steps in-house, and them being provided with a "one stop shop" i am rewarded with bigger orders .

In CIZ's case, they have amalgamated these steps into one company.

We get a smaller royalty percentage initially, but are rewarded by the sales these combined partners will generate.

This is enhanced by a free holding in BIO company and a share in their profits.

Hope this helps

Neil

Will the raise still go ahead?

In my opinion - yes definitely. The money was to be use "primarily" to fund the clinical trials, with the rest going to overheads/IP prot.

The fact we don't need it now to fund the clinical trials means it will all be put to further work, re the development of other cancer detection.

The investors who took part in the placing will be aware of that, and it further reduces any need (in the near term at least) for further funding raises, and gives us a chunk of money we weren't expecting to be used as such.

Will Bill Benhke be able to convince HNW's to stump up the money?

Of course he will. I would be amazed if they haven't already.

Don't forget, the plan all along was for him to market our test, on a results basis. So it is in a new co. (BIO), so what? He would have set this up so as to be a separate legal entity from Benhke Group, in order to be able to keep anything to do with CIZ separate. Would be difficult to sort out remuneration otherwise.

Also a great deal where we get 10% of his company. And did you get the bit about they will continue to support some of the development work in UK?

Strategy to get into UK?

my guess is that Allan won't can't expand on that further as i think we will be relying on the validated results from the US test in order to proceed with UK. If we use the same platform (makes sense, as we can then present US trials validation of evidence towards UK launch, and would be a very quick way in)

I would not expect any mention of ABDX or others, due to NDA's

I don't think that there is any question as to IF this gets to market now. Too much is going on for it not to.

It would be good to see BOD buying shares, but i suspect that with the amount of behind the scenes activity, they are precluded from doing so.

Payments mentioned may seem small at this point, but they are MINIMUM royalty payments.

"No thanks from Corepath?

I don't understand that statement.

Neil

Very happy with that.

Much more concise and informative than previous interview.

Clearly addressed concerns of shareholders - information, process, additional antibody manufacture etc.

A clearer picture of where we are going, how we get there, and importantly the future of further markets/products.

Neil