We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
Mark's spot on, just look at the past 12 months charts - this is literally the same pattern being repeated (and it will happen again, and again, each time rising as the business grows). This has nothing to do with any notion of 'post covid' except for traders who A) still haven't twigged that there is no such thing as post covid and B) that OO isn't a covid play - it just happens to ALSO cater to that immediate need. DYOR as always, but selling because the price has retreated after ATHs is a one-way ticket to losses IMHO
Mark good question, I wondered the same - though my reading of the circular was that the £39m comes from the background capital restructuring, rather than cash in the bank ready to go (but I bow to others in this regard). Either way, let's see the next slide set with an up to date figure. BTW I'm not in the slightest concerned over the matter, just angling for more insight as to the month on month income CF has talked over many times since Q4 2020. Just added a smidgen to my holding as for me the SP is in its typical cycle as we've seen post news the past 12 months or so. Good time to add IMHO.
No OO presentations listed on the 'key dates' section of the website. First time in a while. Looking back at the recent slide deck, and considering what's happened since that presentation it would be nice to come back to a refreshed slide deck at the next show with:
- Refreshed cash balance, hasn't been updated since 31st Dec 2020
- Refreshed (if needed) largest shareholder information
- New infographic to show Immune Modulater has been spun
- Slide on DIM with some indication of first contract
Looking at the volume and trades......surely this is II activity, building a steak. Possibly a TR1 on its way IMHO.
Question re spin off: When discussing one of the spin offs , CF stated the intention was a dual listing , which should make it to NASDAQ within 18 months. Hypothetically (and this question applies to all spin offs), if tomorrow an rns lands that e.g Prep has been spun off, how long is it until PIs like us can independently trade to buy/sell in the new stock without it effecting our OO holding? So for example going on CFs quote for that particular spin off, would that mean that a PI would need to retain his/her OO holding for the duration of 18 months until the new stock is established?
Yeah and I wonder whether those results will have a material impact on the SP anymore. 3 months ago I'd have said yes, but given the ignorance of the uninvested / brokers, they may not fully appreciate the turnaround that's taken place in 2020, and see it as doing just about ok. Clearly, those LTHs and the well-researched in all things OO know just how far the company has traveled in 2020. Interested to see the reaction to what should be a bumper set of results.
Absolutely and let's hope so - it'd make complete sense and they'd have next to no work / restructure to do given its all been done for them. Loss making to profitable business units. Bags of customers. Links to HMG, Wellcome / HIC VAC, possibly China/other gov shortly, staff lined up, facilities ready. No brainer.
You'd have to think so based on that quote. £7.5m for RSV is impressive. Must be due to constraints on availability of HCS space, no way has the value of the RSV study market doubled just because e.g a larger sample size. Goes back to some CF comments about being able to pick and choose which contracts to run with.
I also wonder if the language he's used this time round is in preparation / to reflect recent developments at SGS to offer their own challenge studies close of 2021. Of course that in itself could be a tie-in with OO, but it could be competition and maybe CFs language is in anticipation of OO needing to be the leader in the market place (rather than current position, where its basically a monopoly). Thoughts? I'd be really keen to hear CF comment on SGS news at the next presentation. Either way though, I see it as good news as it just vindicates OO belief that HCS are on the rise and seen as THE way to go for rapid exploration of e.g RSV, e.g Covid, etc etc etc
Yeah absolutely I agree, which is why I'm slightly defensive about the assertion that OO should do anything other than what I and you desribed. I hope C.Chiu is of that understanding also given his comment about releasing a protocol, possibly as an appendix to the first paper. Again, no problem with the principle so long as any commercial advantage is retained by those who've developed it.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/24/covid-trial-infecting-healthy-volunteers-needs-full-transparency-say-campaigners
Positive rebuttle given by lead investigator C.Chiu - and I hope the author is incorrect in the estimation of 'pressure' applied. The protocol clearly has immense commercial value, and it should be released when and only when the creators (OO) are ready to do so. Any 'moral' imperative for openness and transparency has been delivered on 10-times over through ethical approval, MHRA involvement, HMG, external peer review etc - all (side point) led by the worlds only coherent set of experts capable of conducting the trial(s) AND with multiple stakeholder input e.g Imperial College amongst others.
To me the jist of the article and the 'clamour' for public visibility of the protocol is a not very subtle attempt to both release commercially sensitive material and more so to create a media narrative that isn't there which has long been the battle challenge studies have had to overcome, to rationally investigate global health threats with calculated and guarded against risk mitigation. I hope the article crashes and burns because I don't believe the intent behind it is sincere.
That ties in with CF's comments re a subscription model (to the wearables), and would seem to work as a model for them to pass on to their customers rather than buy the data into all of their products. Limits their risk. DIM is definitely an area I'd hope CF has news on or at least further details by the next presentation. The patent has been in place for a little while now, and its definitely one of the most exciting elements to the OO story. Personally, I think its DIM that CF is referencing when he talks of a $1b spin off, not Imutex - but let's see. If DIM is set up outside of OO as a spin-off, I could see this asset having particular value to some of the larger CROs out there who have particular interest in the data space.
Also hoping we get an updated cash balance in the next presentation. Noticed that hadn't been updated for March's presentation.
Thanks T3, more fuel to the fire suggesting an international deal on CHIMS is in the making (at some point). Given your research - interested to hear your views on timelines for the first of the spin offs? Christmas was put forward, and went. '4-6 weeks' has passed. CF is due to next present in 19 days time.
P.P.S I think that's also why you see commentators like e.g Docs post today on Twitter with suggestions of another deal on the way. Wouldn't be surprised if a government-related contract was next / soon to be announced following this thread
P.S I think that's also where CFs phrase 'UK inc' comes from - I think they've cleverly manouvred to become integral to research in this space, at this time
I think that's right (extrader), that's what I took from the article RNS. I think this was more about future signposting of where other RNSs may come in 3-12 months for OO. They haven't teamed up with e.g Wellcome Trust - a largely academic/charitable focused body simply to look good. I think this is all positioning to be seen as THE place to go and to consult on for all things HCS / CHIMS. I think you can see that also from the virtual writing in of challenge studies to the JCVI / MHRA framework for future vaccine discovery. From the moment OO began talks with a government body (HMG), I think they've done well to understand that there's an opportunity here to become synonimous with internationally respected vaccine research efforts. i.e if you're serious in infectious disease research, these are the guys you talk to.
You're right - lots of OO holders (myself included btw) are taking slices of MOGP for FOMO, but really its MOGP holders who ought to be paying attention to these rumours and thinking, I should take a slice of ORPH. Even if the suggestion of a link between MOGP & ORPH proves to be false, it remains the case that ORPH are looking for such a vehicle to spin something out into, so whether it be MOGP or not - if you want that kind of opportunity - get in ORPH (I know I'm preaching to the converted here, but you get the point I'm sure)
ConserV bio have gone from silence to tweeting a fair bit over the past 24-48 hours inc announcement of new partnership eith eRNA. Wonder if there's any news to come from the SEEK attempt to build this into something soon.
Definitely one for PIs to Q next week
I've also shamelessly jumped on the lets follow raglan / CF train - UK SPAC plc. FOMO.
This is an odd piece of news indeed. My concern would be (as some have alluded to) that if this is NOT OO related, then it's a pretty major distraction to have your (OO) CEO pursueing other paths - and if that proves to be the case, frankly CF should get both barrells at the next presentation. Is he about to jump ship when his lock-in ends in June perhaps?
However, that seems unlikely - in which case, if it is OO related.....it's a bizarre left-field move and will need some detail on how this could go from what is a CF investment to an OO stake (in whatever vehicle it is / will be). Anyone who can put the connection together to show what we're missing gets a medal from me.