Not OO specific - but just wondering if anyone has any thoughts on potential for capital gains tax to be changed in the budget next week?
In particular, does anyone know if (hypothetically) CGT increases / changes, would changes take effect immediately (?) or would they be implemented for the new tax year (April) ?
Agreed Barwick, and whilst relevant this deal doesn't seem to represent competition. Its not infectious disease focused datasets (because they haven't got that data). Pretty easy to see how/why this could tie in nicely with OO datasets in the future, arguably for a big medtech company if not ICON.
Sorry I've just had a chance to watch this. How did anyone come away from this presentation with a negative view? It was solid on all fronts!? May not be new information to the well researched but there were certainly no alarm-bells in there
Very weird. If you google his account, twitter says it no longer exists....It doesn't say he deleted it...is there a possibility that Twitter themselves shut it down if the tweet was felt to be in breach of any of their policies...? Just a thought - not familiar with how well they pick up on market sensitive information (or not).
If we assume he deleted it......what is the point? Why would you A) know the information, B) be brazen enough to want to tweet it and then within minutes C) delete it either through panic or through better judgement.... and yet..... the alternative is that the tweet is BS....which seems even more random and unlikely for somebody seemingly positive about a stock from his prior tweets. Let's see in 12 hours..
Yes please.
What is CF's timetable for the 1st announcement on Disease in Motion, whether that be spinning out, or a 'data deal' with wearable/other company access?
CF outlined 4-6 weeks for one spin-off announcement. That was 2.5 weeks ago. Does this timetable stand (i.e now 2-4 weeks).
Think we can be pretty confident today is (in part) an Invesco day. Rounded trades of 50k a time made throughout the day so far. 13 and counting.
That’s encouraging. Assume that applies regardless of broker. HL...?
Mark, as far as I understand it, that's company specific......so I don' think there is a 'set' time (but happy to be told I'm wrong if anyone knows better?). So I think OO have a set of choices ahead of them as to how they play this. They could play with the cut off time/date depending on what they want to achieve. Other recent examples have been discussed on this board. Personally, for this one (which I'm assuming is the Immune Modulater), I'd prefer them to not give others a chance to get in after an announcement. Also - I think it's been assumed that this 1st one will be a cash payment - it may not be, lets see. For this one (assuming its the modulater), if its being utilised to tackle Long Covid as suggested in the slide-deck.....could easily be a stand alone / in house item for another company that could be a share offering IMHO, though a cash payment would obviously be more certain for OO shareholders. In terms of value........not a clue. There's been so little talk of this item with all the focus on Imutex / Prep in the past, BUT, again if it is the modulater and if it truely can address Long Covid (at all)......that's got to carry a heavy purse....
Also noticed that 20 minutes after I posted this ^^^ Eskers made the same point on Twitter - obviously keeps an eye on this board, and suggests that this must be a new development as suspected
Yes it’s definitely there slide 13, final bullet point. ‘Potential application for Long COVID-19’ . Obviously it’s only a mild reference ‘potential’ but I’m not sure LONG COVID was referred to previously in the slide deck which would suggest a reason for change. Happy to be told I’m wrong if somebody spots it in past versions
Did anyone else pick up on the non-core slide that the Immune Modulater had a specific reference to Long COVID by it? It was also hinted at by CF. Discussed potential Imutex value before but not Immune Modulater. Anyone hazard a guess at how that could look (£-£££) if it turns out to be the first non-core asset monetised ?
Agreed re Marks comment - hue appeal for social / cultural settings if this really does what it says on the tin (so to speak). This is yet another item that really does need some numbers put to it for us to fully understand its significance. Given MT says it isn't price sensitive....that would suggest to me that it isn't as transformational as first hoped - but (no disrespect to the source), but that's an alleged comment in a linkedin message - if an RNS drops Mon - Weds or CF puts some flesh on the bones, that's what will matter (or not). Regardless, pre this news, surely this is a week where the majority are expecting an RNS (on any number of fronts).
Likewise, but that only leaves a small window.
This week's been very quiet on the ConserV front - had expected a bit more information to drip through. Let's see
Fun and games again I see. Maybe WSB will come and rescue OO from manipulation lol.
Essentially, OO needs a trading update issued to shareholders, otherwise as Peter & Mark have said we're either under-valued or valued on only part of our assets, both are problematic for PIs in these conditions. Maybe tomorrow morning will bring a change
Agreed, the II is a subject that needs addressing, not because one institution is or isn't selling / buying but because the narrative given doesn't match the reality. The only FACT we have on recent activity is that Invesco have halved their stake (or thereabouts). I don't see that as a problem in isolation, but CF must feel obligated to touch on it in the next presentation or two to prevent a lack of confidence breeding. Yes, he may not want the SP bouncing up and down day to day, but £ will flow elsewhere if investors don't see the returns he has (on numerous occasions) targeted (50% growth per 6 months). There's several items that could X2 x3 x4 the mcap in the right wind, and some of that has to be able to flow or else there is a risk of being taken out at a lower than (potential) value. IMHO. For me, the trajectory re Imutex/Covid/ConserV/SEEK is going to be the key by which to judge the potential value over the coming months. There's so much in favour of the assets at hand, that if the vehicle (however its formed / packaged) gives even a sniff at a univeral jab / all-coronavirus jab then theres a colossal incentive for PIs and IIs.
Yeah I think Mark Shares makes a good point and i notice its been made by somebody else too on Biondvax and Orph twitter chat. If they wanted to, they could definitely raise the capital, and thinking of it from their point of view rather than Orph's - surely they've discussed it because they can't really afford to see Flu-v succeed with somebody else....it would be a big blow to their reputation / utility overall I think. But who knows what's happening with ConserV atm. Hoping some more details emerge before CF is due to speak on the 3rd. If they don't every single attendee should press him on this subject!
On that note, tomorrow will be an interesting finish to the week. If Invesco are truely looking to dump stock, tomorrow is their opportunity to sell into the rise. Let's see.
Following previous post on financials. Agreed it'll be interesting to see some numbers that include the second half of 2020. Is there any reason we wouldn't see these in coming weeks/Q1 ? Appreciate they're not obligated to deliver them until the summer (I believe?) but surely the company are motivated to evidence progress.....?
What do people envisage the ball-park year end figure to look like? Demon I notice you estimate loss circa £5m
P.s if we took (what I think is a negative estimate of) 10% of ConserV share capital as mentioned by previous poster, based on ConserV’s currently listed vaccine assets/development phases, where do investors think any Nasdaq listing would begin (in terms of valuation), or rather what valuation would you be positive / negative over based on those assets?