Member Info for notaflipper

Test volumes for the first half are in excess of 22,000 (H1 2016: 11,000 tests; full year to March 2017: 24,000 tests). Premaitha 1st half test volumes, excluding Yourgene, were up 140% to c.15,000 tests. Now you can see the 22,000+ announced today is a significant % of a billion dollar industry How does circa 50k to 60k test volumes compare to the rest of the NIPT market?: (a) Ariosa (Roche) including licensees: 213,300 tests (22% Market share) (b) Sequenom: 153,900 tests (c) Verinata (Illumina): 192,000 tests (d) IP Pool (Sequenom & Illumina): 489,300 tests (50% Market share) (e) Natera including licensees: 254,900 tests (26% Market share but fair dues to you Dibs I had to sell out at IMM to cover my position here (before the spike) so that's one up on me

With respect to Genoma I would say this is a write-off. My reasoning here is that the Genoma brand is now widely tainted so there is no reason for Espirite to pay Premaitha to resurrect the company from bankruptcy imposed by Premaitha. I have separately explained how Espirita now has its own proprietary NIPT technology. In terms of tainted branded Genoma Group (a completely separate company in Italy) won its case in December of the use of Genoma brand against the company GENOMA SA Swiss Biothecnology of the Esperite group in December. From July 2015 to May 2017, companies GENOMA SA Swiss Biothecnology, part of the ESPERITE group and represented in Italy by CRYOSAVE srl, and GENOMA MOLECULAR GENETICS LABORATORY (Italiana), were the protagonists of a civil case claiming the right to the registered trademark "GENOMA", with the sole ownership of GENOMA MOLECULAR GENETICS LABORATORY. The case, which was concluded in favour of Genoma Group, resulted in a judgment ruling that GENOMA SA Swiss Biotechnology, since 2014, unlawfully used the GENOMA trademark of Genoma Group's title for "parasitic" purposes having created in the public the erroneous conviction of a bond between itself and Genoma Group and thus having benefited from the reputation of the latter in the Italian market. In particular, GENOMA SA Swiss Biotechnology has operated in the Italian market by implementing the following "confusing" strategies: · The creation of a Swiss company with a corporate name GENOMA SA, substantially identical to the Genoma Group's name, after its refusal to enter into a commercial partnership with the ESPERITE holding to which Genoma SA belongs; · Operations in the Italian market without the use of Genoma Group, but using the company GENOMA SA, placing it prudently in Swiss territory; · The declaration of having an unincorporated seat in Italian territory; · The suggestion by the Swiss company GENOMA SA to provide its own scientific informant to provide all customers with incorrect information that would act as a substitute for a colleague who actually works for GENOMA Italiana, creating confusion in healthcare professionals with likely to mislead customers. The Court of Rome therefore concluded the case in favor of the Italian company GENOMA Group, declaring the illegality of the use of the GENOMA Swiss Biothecnology trademark prohibiting the use of any distinctive sign of its activity to the Swiss competitor and partner CRYOSAVE srl and its products containing the term "GENOMA". The court in Rome also condemned the Swiss company: · Withdrawal of any test and / or product bearing the brand "GENOMA Swiss Biothecnology" with no marketing of such products; · The sale of internet domains www.genoma.it and www.genoma.com to the Italian company GENOMA MOLECULAR GENETICS LABORATORY; · Publishing a sentence extract on two national newspapers, on a speci

Although some have suggested that the delay in the interims (where the 2nd week of December release was widely informally suggested further than Brainspark) was due to a potential Illumina settlement this always seemed like a further instance of back-room bravado. As Illumina are not the exclusive licensee of the patents that are claimed to be infringed any settlement would have to involve the original patent holders and affiliates though I suspect hey will follow Illumina’s lead. "Illumina argued that, in practice, all the Affiliates were under the control of Illumina. After considering the evidence and some prior case law, the judge, Mr Justice Carr, concluded at paragraph 254 that Illumina was not an exclusive licensee for the purposes of section 130 and therefore did not have title to sue an infringer, though the patent owner did" Source: https://ipdraughts.wordpress.com/2017/12/16/really-dont-make-affiliates-a-contracting-party/ So any settlement would need to include the following: HC-2015-001175 VERINATA HEALTH, INC SEQUENOM, INC (now part of LabCorp) THE TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY HP-2015-000047 THE CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG HC-2015-001175 HP-2015-000047 SEQUENOM, INC The idea that all these solicitors were working through Christmas and just missed today’s deadline is not really credible as most solicitors I deal with all suggested that the 15th December was their last effective working date. Also Illumina BoD have been a bit distracted as some have been appointed to Disney BoD in December. Expecting however a settlement in January and a sale in Q1

On the move so apologies for brief response but my understanding was that the hearing in March was related to the '321 claim (the further patent claim raised in Sep k17) where a £1.2m legal provision has been made. In January they will have a further meeting with the Judge Carr on the patent infringement judgements in November where you they will have to announce if commercial settlement is possible or not. TFO funding kicked down the line till then. Although Hardman sales targets will not be met (yet again) depending on outcome above they still are cautiously expecting to achieve break-even so costs dramatically cut

I suspect that with Esperite launching AGAATA, its exclusive Genetic Diagnostic System (which covers Prenatal, Reproductive Health, Oncology, Inherited Diseases) we will not see any of the monies owed back from them. This is their CE-IVD based on patented proprietary technology. This should not be alarming to investors as this has already been included with the Financial Accounts which have assumed no recoveries will be made and still forecast Break Even in this financial year. There are as ever interesting theorisations as to whether a deal is possible with Illumina, under what external pressures, for which regions, and the impact on current and potential customers etc. I imagine these discussions will go on till a clarity, and a potential conclusion is reached, at the next High Court hearing. Some posts it has to be said are monosyllabic than others. I did take encouragement that yesterday’s contract announcements within EU shows some confidence in the BoD’s private assurances. LTHs should be minded that Sequenom’s loss to Ariosa Diagnostics led to a distressed sale only a month after their patent case loss. The challenges discussed at nausea here only underline the pressures upon and limited timeframe available to the BoD. It could be an idea to hold one’s nerve and average down in advance of a sale which would need to clear the high watermark (24.6p) . ATB to all LTHs

Key thing for me is that this was in Europe. Key concrete vote of confidence that the existing circa £2m sales in Europe have a realistic contingency plan than new distributors believe in Twix I guess you have to take it all back now?

Cheers Twix, I have been very mindful this last few weeks of Sequenom loosing in the Federal Appeals courts against Ariosa Diagnostics in June 2016. This led directly to their acquisition by LabCorp in July 2016 for 2,40 dollars per share of 302m. The sale being completed by September 2016. There were some Sequenom LTHs @ 4dollars who got caught out hence my post.

Valiant effort once again however I am afraid that anything that will be posted here will inevitably be shouted down by the same posters posting the same one-line comment, the same words perhaps in different order with the same hysteria. That said with the large trades and spreads being taken I believe that some players are taking up positions now. The referenced legal blog goes through some of the legal arguments and does explain that the shifting IP landscape referenced by Investor Relations was in relation to Actavis v Eli Lilly decision from the Supreme Court in July 2017. This should have been considered by Premaitha's counsel with a view to settlement. http://patentblog.kluweriplaw.com/2017/11/24/testing-testing-1-2-3-illumina-v-premaitha/ The mixed/unmixed nature of the judgement would suggest that an appeal though talked about would not be the preferred option of the BoD. Although there are the same hysteria posts by the same posters that a deal is unlikely I am quite confident that a deal would be announced by the next High Court appearance. Simply put the Judge would consider whether a commercial settlement is possible and would not be likely to be generous on injuctive relief or punitive damages if an offer had been made. There is precedent to this as Innogene and Centrum Bandan also made a settlement with Illumina to switch onto their platform and punitive damages were not sought etc. Ultimately Illumina care more of the sequencers sales as this is a lager market. My original investment decision here was that I expected AR to make a quick 'flip' in advance of Illumina's Verifi CE-IVD NIPT. This did not happen and there has been some horrendous events of Rupert Llywood's massive share sales, the Genoma debacle (where still no monies have been recovered since placing them in bankruptcy earlier in the year), the failure to control the media debate of the Downs Syndrome support groups and not concentrating early enough on international sales and frequently falling below Haardman's sales forecasts. At the same time there has been a doubling of the shares in circulation and a doubling of the Management Team and BoD. My investment rationale now is simply because I believe a sale is now inevitable in the next year hence massively averaging down. In any sale event the high-watermark of the TMO warrants would have to be cleared. The sp vs sales also shows that the current sp is undervalued even if there needs to be a provision of a cash settlement with Illumina or so impact on sales growth in the UK/EU area in the medium term.

Steady on brainspark as I think we may start off Twix showering SL with praises if he believed that would help I'm sure there are many LTHs (VIY and NIPT) who however will be joining Twix in the salute he's been using at his screen when he found out the news and been practicing all day Part of me does hope it has something to do with the NHS NIPT training programme which has been discretely underway https://phescreening.blog.gov.uk/2017/11/30/hundreds-have-already-attended-new-nipt-training/

I'm expecting interim to be announced shortly, next week hopefully. There would be a further confirmation then if break-even will be achieved, which I suspect will also be given. There will be another appearance before the High Court judge where a commercial compromise being possible would have to be announced in consideration whether leave to appeal is required etc.

My understanding of the TMO Warrants is that the following have been issued. Date No of shares Executable Price Dec-17 20,325,204 24.6 Sep-16 17,094,018 11.7 Mar-17 16,913,319 11.825 Jul-17 28,938,797 10.725 Some of these Warrants expire within 8 years. As a % of the 321m shares, these 83,271,338 shares represents 26% with an average price roughly calculate to be 14p. With a potential further 10% of warrants issued at 8p+ TMO will be closing at 40% of the share capital reducing their average further. It should then just be a matter of time (subject to debate) when a take-out will be agreed. I suspect however that having bought 40% of the company with an average in the low teens TMO will not wait 2+ years to buy the rest of the company over 50p so there's an opportunity here for new entrants and those which can average down

Sorry I got the £9m from Marketbeat.com. Interestingly enough they say that the Corporate rating has been reaffirmed yesterday by Finncap as well though not showing on LSE website though confirmed on twitter. Thanks for the correction

Current market capitalisation I belive is £9m vs Year End Sales of circa £ 11m and breakeven confirmed by company, Game plan for many remaining LTHs is average down and wait for sale next year. Let's just get deal done now, settle and move on.

How overly dramatic and self flagging your posts have become lol Some would miss you put 80k in yesterday. Premaitha have now closing onto 10% of a billion dollar NIPT market share. The deal has to be worked but even a distressed sell would still clear the high water mark of TMO Warrants and bring most LTHs home. Hopefully more news this week but looks like sale likely next year or sooner in any event for multiples of today's price

Exactly so all this talk of no deal being possible or at terms that would involve incredibly massive share dilution is fear mongering by some. A sale even on a distressed basis of 24p+ to cover the high water mark of the TMO Warrants.

I do not think the significance of the 11,000 test volume was fully appreciated here. Test volumes for the first half are expected to be in excess of 22,000 (H1 2016: 11,000 tests; full year to March 2017: 24,000 tests) . Premaitha 1st half test volumes, excluding Yourgene, were up 140% to c.15,000 tests. Now you can see the 11,000 announced today is a big jump up How does circa 50k to 60k test volumes compare to the rest of the NIPT market?: (a) Ariosa (Roche) including licensees: 213,300 tests (22% Market share) (b) Sequenom: 153,900 tests (c) Verinata (Illumina): 192,000 tests (d) IP Pool (Sequenom & Illumina): 489,300 tests (50% Market share) (e) Natera including licensees: 254,900 tests (26% Market share) You can google what the market capitalisation so Natera's is US$ 712.66M the number of tests yield.

I think all the speculation and fear mongering is just making us go in circles and we are repeating may of the past discussions that have been had already since last Wednesday. The company has already stated directly via Investor Relations or via TW what the expect will be the likelihood of any damages. They've stated it cannot be punitive and that the impact can only be felt on UK operations in the first instance. Will there likely be a settlement? Yes. What will be the impact of a license fee? Probably �50-�75 per test according to what they were charging GOSH. Is this a big deal? No as the IONA test is one of the cheapest around and the company has released RNS that they are making the test cheaper to run. Will there need to be a massive share dilution for the business to cope? I don't think so. Is the company still growing and can any loss of sales or damages be mopped up within the anticipated sales of next year. Yes. Only things LTHs can do now is average down now. Settle and move on. Pump up the price and sell to TMO in short order.

I do not think a general placing will happen. I think the market has already priced in that a further issue of Warrants will be issued to TMO. They have already gotten 30% of the company for $15m so I would expect them to get a further tranche. This in some ways the market would welcome as it would underline TMO’s continued support. It would also indicate that in time a likely offer will be made by them. When? All speculation but this may only occur around the time that the interims are released as it would allow the BoD to first declare that they are on target to achieve break-even this financial year. It would also allow them to agree the financial settlement with Illumina. I like most LTHs don’t know why they just don’t go all the way and make a full offer as by then they would have close to 40% but it would certainly be welcome by me. Either way as others have suggested the market capitalisation vs the revenues of the existing contracts alone make the share price very cheap.

On that basis I guess we're expecting more RNS this week with numbers. easy profit for some

The revenues seem bit light given that the number of tests and I think are more than the UK. The number of tests according to Hardman Sep 17 (discredited) of H1 2017 was 22,000 tests vs 11,000 is H1 2016. So the volume is very significant. Maybe they're being pessimistic. The point I think they're making which we should receive is the UK market can be replaced with the existing pipeline.