Member Info for OilNovice

Surely it will be the manufacturer / distributor that sees the biggest slice of margin??
Cytiva will buy the Affimer at say $1 per strip (I don't know the actual cost - this is illustrative), the cost to manufacture the kit is another $1. Total is $2. Cytiva then sell at $15 and make a healthy $13 margin...

SO, AVCT will only make margin on the $1 strip sale. Albeit hopefully a very large volume of sales.
BUT, there are also royalties agreed (which is sounds like they will have in place)?? This will likely be a small % of Cytiva profit margin no?

Thanks Chris.
But we are still in the first tranche of £250k?? So can we expect another potential 3x conversions at 0.009p before we move onto the second tranche?

updownaround - it is in the RNS that the 'Investor' is receiving 555,555,555 shares in return for a £50k cash payment to ICON. That is a share price of 0.009p (so far 2x conversions of a possible 5).
If we assume the large trade yesterday was the 'Investor' selling shares, the trade price was 0.026p for 150,000,000 shares. That equates to a c.189% profit margin for the 'Investor'.
Their first tranche was sold at an even higher sell price...

So yes, the 'Investor' IS making a very large profit off this stock.

Peter - this fund is likely to be increasing its holdings by another 1,666,666,665 shares in the near future so not sure your analogy will hold true...
Would be blooming marvellous if it did go up 3600%!

Tuesday 5th May 2020, at precisely 14:43, this share will 'take off'.
Friday 17th July 2020, at precisely 08:51, this share will reach a peak of 0.773p.
Monday 20th July 2020, at precisely 07:00, this share will no longer exist.

Just call me Nostradamus... HAHA...

(And yes, I am taking the p!ss)

Joey / F458
I believe the conversion price is set for each £250k tranche and will be revised up/down depending on the VWAP at the time of issue. My assumption is that the 0.009p price was the 80% volume weighted average price at the time of issue - just after suspension was lifted. Would be good if someone could confirm / rebut?

Now, I have a couple of questions:
1 - If ICON decide not to issue any more loan notes for the first tranche / month and do not take any further money from the 'Investor', can they wait for the second tranche and revise up the conversion price at a higher share price?
2 - Is each tranche timebound (i.e. the £250k limit expires one month after issue), or is it moneybound (i.e. the £250k must be issued before the next tranche can be released)?

Thanks

I think there is more to it than poor day trading...
This share needs volume so the 'investor' can recycle (forward sell) the next tranche of 555,555,555 shares.
There may have been some manipulation early on to peak people's interest so the 'investor' could offload without crashing the sp.
Maybe some 'traders' willing to push the sp up in the morning and selling at a loss pm... Or maybe it is just nothing.

Just my thoughts.

Moving up.
0.042 bid
0.048 ask

Bill - you need to take a step back and look at this from the Board's perspective, not a shareholder.
It's the only way of understanding.
Essentially, every decision is a commercial one. With the beneficiaries being David Sefton or the Board. They need to be selfish and ensure they get paid as well as possible:
- David Sefton took over a company (WDC) that had access to a large amount of funding through EHGOS
- He orchestrated the 'kicking out' of the WDC Board, which I believe is where the 'legacy debt' issues are stemming from (a nice golden handshake, ahem :/)
- He saw the WDC company as a vehicle to get an acorn start-up (ICON) onto the main market - and continue getting funding
- He brought in his good friends LH and JQ to lead ICON and develop a business plan / strategy for growth (these guys are clearly the digital / media brains, but probably not very commercially savvy)
- He got their house in order by creating an umbrella company and subsidiaries. And oversaw the winding up of all WDC businesses (plus pay-offs)
- He has let LH and JQ build the business and manage its operations
- Sefton merely sorts out the Financing Agreements with EHGOS to ensure he gets a nice salary (or consultants fee now he's been kicked out) for doing very little
- The Financing Agreements will ensure all Board members are being paid for the foreseeable future, regardless of revenue and contracts

This is all in my opinion, and I also believe that once they start to realise large revenues / contracts and start making profit, Sefton will be one of the largest equity holders (probably through one of his venture capital companies).

Micky - How long before we can be free of dilution? That is the key question :/
I believe it will be when we have enough revenue from contracts to cover our operating costs + enough to pay off legacy debts... According to the 6-Month Report RNS, currently we are running at c.£125k operating costs per month + c.£300k of legacy debt (though this may be lower).

So... if all our contracts add up to over £125k per month revenue, we are good.
I believe we will then get significant interest from IIs who will purchase equity and the Board will use this investment to pay off debt and for BD etc...
The Board will probably also purchase shares just before this happens as well...

We will have to wait until the Annual Report (Jul19-Jun20) which will likely be released Aug/Sep 2020.

Mickey - people were 'celebrating' because the first 555,555,555 shares from the first £50k conversion had been sold into the open market. The TR1s today has confirmed this.
It is generally good news when converted shares have been recycled into the market, as it allows the market to give the 'floor' share price and normally would be the start of a recovery from the diluting effects of the new shares.

Unfortunately here, the Board have chosen to enact more dilution at the same time... hence the drop in share price.

Mickey - EHGOS, the 'Investor', are providing a facility of £250k every month to be drawn down by the Board in the form of loan notes, initially for £2m but up to £5m. These are convertible at 0.009p this month - and so far the Board has drawn down two £50k tranches (555,555,555 shares each when converted).

In my opinion, these draw downs are likely to continue until we are cash flow positive, or have II investment.

Interesting read!
The takeaway for me is this (in the conclusion):

"We need to deliver 5 million tests per day by early June to deliver a safe social reopening. This number will need to increase over time (ideally by late July) to 20 million a day to fully remobilize the economy. Achieving these numbers depends on testing innovation. We acknowledge that even this number may not be high enough to protect public health. In that considerably less likely eventuality, we will need to scale testing up much further. By the time we know if we need to do that, we should be in a better position to know how to do it."

And these figures are for USA only.
Timing works for AVCT (end of May).
As long as they are within accuracy / specificity guidelines this should get through FDA EUA approval.
Then there is the UK market + international markets...

Two II's have purchased a combined 11m shares at 18p (this was calculated at a small discount to the VWAP in early April - standard practice). It is good news that these shares, worth £2m, were taken up by only two II's - shows confidence.
I see these II's as investors rather than financiers i.e. they will not dump the shares when they are subscribed to the market next Friday.

I take this as positive.

Rameriz - the rally was primarily due to Gilead Sciences reporting their successful phase 3 Covid-19 human trials.

Cristal - just to add. The potential rise in SP/MCAP is not only based on fundamentals for these types of companies. There is a large element of speculation here, particularly with the Covid-19 testing. People are clearly happy to pay many multiples of current earnings on the 'hope' that the test is successful and will be a large revenue generator this year.

Retainer contract for commercial management.
Interesting that Sefton is involved - but good in that his equity company is taking a stake in TLE rather than ICON...
I see this as positive.
Pure revenue and profit share, rather than investment.

The selling will likely be forward selling by the 'Investor'.
They need to offload 555,555,555 shares ASAP... :/

applegarth - another wonderful story of your previous gambling. Thank you so much for sharing...

So let me understand this:
- You did no research into a company.
- You did no technical analysis.
- You bought in on a whim and lost money.
- So you bought in again when they had a duster and lost more money.
- You then got lucky and made some good money.
- The company then got suspended and shareholders will likely lose everything.

Can you share some stories of the bets you made that went wrong please?

SimonsFuture - you cannot compare UKOG an exploratory oil company to ICON.
UKOG were drilling a previously known oil prospect in horse hill that had been estimated to have a low probability of success. It turned out to be a larger, better reserve than expected... The 'explosion' in sp was based on the amount of oil it discovered and could commercialise. Plus it had additional pockets of oil discoveries.

An explosion in sp for ICON would require a similar commercial realisation - i.e. large revenue streams that are very profitable. Essentially, they need to get enough revenue to pay their costs + pay off their debt + make a profit. We know they currently take £250k per month from the 'investor' so that would be the minimum revenue needed to be cashflow neutral.
But, for the sp to increase, they will need more, as they need to pay off legacy debt (RNS stated £200k left) + likely penalty interest being accrued from 'Investor' conversions...
Also, to get to £250k per month revenue, I would have thought they would need more staff which means more costs.

I only have hope left.