Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
As an LTH, I’m torn between being annoyed at being down so much on paper from ATHs, but the risk/reward trade off at 43p looks compelling, and hopefully most bad news is out of the way. I’m topping up, taking advantage of the price being at levels we thought were history, and optimistic about 2024.
· Generated an operating netback of $6,011,000, representing a 37 percent increase from the 2022 third quarter primarily reflecting incremental Cascadura natural gas and NGL production volumes.
· Reported funds flow from operations of $2,432,000 in the third quarter of 2023 compared to $6,000 in the preceding quarter and $256,000 in the prior year equivalent quarter.
· Recognized net earnings of $988,000 and comprehensive income of $809,000 in the quarter compared to a net loss of $778,000 and a comprehensive loss of $1,228,000 reported in the third quarter of 2022.
Transformational stuff. GLA.
This is brilliant. The most bullish RNS so far, with a clear road to what so many of us hoped was coming. Transformational stuff of the company and, more importantly, for cancer treatment.
Don’t really care what the SP does here today or over the next few weeks. Let it play out and let’s see where we are in 12-18 months. Hold on tight.
From what he says in the interview]. sounds like this contract is with the same client as the contract announced on 4 May.
It's an encouraging sign that this board is still relatively quiet even though the SP is up more than 20% today. Expect the herd to arrive tomorrow (esp once the poster is in the public domain) and hopefully help us past £1 before the final bell. Sets things up nicely for the real rise next week.
This feeling is so ugly and hard to describe. like being a kid who's waited all year and counted the sleeps until Christmas, only to wake up on Christmas morning to realise that Santa hasn't been, that he was always a myth, and you've been burgled and all your stuff has been nicked. Devastating.
Please look after yourselves and, no matter how hard it is this morning, keep the good things in your world front of mind and be grateful that you still have them.
For anyone who needs reassurance, a quick glance at the Careers page on Synairgen's lovely new website might help calm any nerves. Look at the job descriptions too. These are serious roles.
Why would management to out to hire senior US based roles like these if they've seen the data and think there's any doubt over whether it works and will sell?
The results will land at some point. It doesn't matter if it's today or at the end of March. The share price ups and downs and worrying and baiting messages on this board won't affect what those results contain. I'm cutting out the noise and staying patient, and adding if this drops any further. Bring it on.
A great way of capping any SP recovery before the raise, even in the unlikely event that good news lands. Even their wording for a simple communication like this leaves more questions than answers. Beyond belief.
As announced on 18 August 2021, Novacyt continues to supply PROmate® COVID-19 tests to the NHS under the terms of a new contract awarded by the DHSC under the Public Health England National Microbiology Framework.
£'000
H1 2021
Underlying
H1 2021
DHSC dispute impact
H1 2021
Total Group
Total Group Revenue
53,950
53,950
Gross Profit
38,044
(35,770)
2,274
GP %
71%
4%
EBITDA
EBITDA %
23,169
43%
(35,770)
(12,601)
-23%
Consistent with the announcement on 22 June 2021, the underlying business will generate gross profit of approximately 71% of sales and EBITDA of approximately 43% of sales for the half year, excluding the impact of the DHSC dispute. The Company's cash position as at 30 June 2021 was £77.2 million.
This announcement contains inside information for the purposes of Article 7 of Regulation (EU) 596/2014.
- End -
RNS Number : 9251L
Novacyt S.A.
16 September 2021
Novacyt S.A.
("Novacyt", the "Company" or the "Group")
Proposed accounting treatment of ongoing DHSC dispute in 2021 interim results
Paris, France and Camberley, UK - 16 September 2021 - Novacyt (EURONEXT GROWTH: ALNOV; AIM: NCYT), an international specialist in clinical diagnostics, announces the proposed accounting treatment of the ongoing DHSC dispute on its unaudited H1 2021 interim results for the six months ended 30 June 2021. The interim results are expected to be announced on 27 September 2021.
There has been no further update to the announcement made at the time of the Company's full year results on 22 June 2021, and subsequent half year update on 18 August 2021, in relation to the DHSC dispute. The accounting treatment of the DHSC revenue and costs in H1 2021, detailed below, does not change the Company's legal position or rights in relation to the dispute. The Company continues to work with its legal advisers to progress the dispute and believes it has strong grounds to assert its contractual rights.
The Company reiterates revenue guidance, excluding the disputed DHSC revenue, for the full year of approximately £100 million and underlying EBITDA margin of approximately 40%, as announced on 22 June 2021. However, the full year Group EBITDA margin could be materially affected by the outcome of the ongoing dispute with the DHSC and the write down of inventory as detailed below.
At the time of the Company's half year update on 18 August 2021, it was noted that £40.8 million of revenue in H1 2021 was in dispute with the DHSC. For the purposes of the interim results, the Company is required to apply the applicable accounting standards to the disputed revenues. The Board has therefore taken a conservative approach and decided that while the dispute with the DHSC remains unresolved the Company will not recognise the H1 2021 revenue of £40.8 million from the DHSC, in line with IFRS 15 accounting standard on revenue from contracts with customers. The remaining H1 2021 revenue of £54.0 million from non-DHSC sales remains unchanged.
In addition to not recognising the £40.8 million of DHSC sales in its interim results, the Company has prudently decided to recognise manufacturing costs of £6.9 million relating to these disputed sales.
The Company is also taking an exceptional one-off cost of £28.9m to write down inventory that the Company had built in anticipation of further DHSC demand and to terminate supply commitments with third parties in respect of this supply that are no longer required. This inventory build was Novacyt's direct response to support the UK Government's call for UK manufacturers to build manufacturing capacity and supply chain flexibility in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and was based on likely demand indicated by DHSC. The Company will continue to look for ways to use this inventory.
(part 1)
HedgeHogath - thanks for replying. My reading is also that it is Nasdaq only and not LSE. It sounds like a change in thinking from the Board from that original release. Hopefully an interview shortly to clarify.
HedgeHogarth - please can you clarify where it's been confirmed that Accustem will be listed in the UK too? It's not in this RNS and the wording that the BoD "has resolved that the Nasdaq listing venue is more appropriate to the nature of Accustem's business" begs the question more appropriate than what alternative (UK? no second listing?). I'd be delighted if you're correct but it would be good to see written confirmation that there will be a UK listing because I can't see it in this RNS. Thanks.
I can't see that this has been mentioned on this Board but Education Secretary Gavin Williamson was on Radio 4 this morning and he was challenged directly on whether mass testing in schools would still go ahead. He said that mass testing in schools was continuing and was "going to be a really important part of bringing schools back, being able to fully test all those children returning back to secondary schools..."
You can listen back to the interview on Radio 4 the BBC Sounds app, the Today programme, 2h 15mins into the recording.
A bit more:
"Previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses have compared nasopharyngeal swabs with saliva sampling. These reviews were done earlier in the pandemic and were limited by few studies (=8) and the participant populations (majority symptomatic) examined at the time. Our meta-analysis builds on this literature with more diverse participant populations, settings, and saliva collection methods. An important additional advantage is our paired economic evaluation, making explicit the potential tradeoffs with moving to saliva sampling. At a prevalence of 1%, our analysis suggests that the added cost ($8093) of detecting an additional SARS-CoV-2 infection with nasopharyngeal swabs could be used to collect more than 3900 saliva samples.
Saliva sampling is an immediate way to expand testing access, while freeing up much-needed health care resources. Saliva sampling has already launched in some jurisdictions, and a laboratory protocol has received emergency use authorization from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Although laboratories analyzing saliva will need to validate analytic methods, this can be done and implemented much more quickly than approving, producing, and distributing new tests, such as those intended to be used daily or at the point of care.
Maintaining a high level of testing has been repeatedly shown to be an important part of public health strategies to contain SARS-CoV-2. Although laboratory reagents (such as primers and extraction reagents) are an ongoing bottleneck, so too is access to nasopharyngeal swabs (and viral transport media) and trained health care professionals to administer them. Such methods as pooling samples may overcome some reagent shortages when SARS-CoV-2 prevalence is low, but no such methods are available for swabs. Even if a minority of persons may not be able to produce adequate amounts of saliva—and thus would require a nasopharyngeal swab—nasopharyngeal swabs are an uncomfortable method of specimen collection that also carries risk for occupational exposure to the health care workers collecting the samples... a less invasive and cheaper approach with similar sensitivity may allow a rapid increase in testing, while freeing up much-needed health care professionals for forthcoming vaccinations.
The most important strength of this study is the large number of studies included in the meta-analysis, with participants from many settings with diverse clinical characteristics. These qualities permitted extensive stratified analyses to examine potentially important sources of variability, such as saliva collection method, study setting, testing purpose, and presence of symptoms. We found consistent results in nearly all stratified analyses, enhancing generalizability."
"In this study, saliva sampling had similar yield to and lower costs than nasopharyngeal swabs for detecting SARS-CoV-2... we suggest that saliva sampling should replace nasopharyngeal swabs in most populations being tested.
New research titled "The Sensitivity and Costs of Testing for SARS-CoV-2 Infection With Saliva Versus Nasopharyngeal Swabs", published by the Annals of Internal Medicine this evening.
A systematic review of 37 studies, 7332 paired samples.
Link here: https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/abs/10.7326/M20-6569?journalCode=aim
Concludes:
"Saliva sampling seems to be a similarly sensitive and less costly alternative that could replace nasopharyngeal swabs for collection of clinical samples for SARS-CoV-2 testing."
Tweeted just now by Eric Topol: https://twitter.com/erictopol/status/1348758183846703104?s=21
And this on p60:
"The Company intends to accelerate the development of hand-held nebulizer inhalation technology to
deliver stable aerosols of TZLS-501 (anti-IL-6R mAb) and potentially other antiviral drugs such as
remdesivir directly to lungs to treat COVID-19 by Q2 2021. The Company believes TZLS-501 (antiIL6R mAb) combined with this newly introduced inhalation technology may rapidly inhibit
inflammation in lungs and in combination with intravenous administration may deplete circulating
levels of IL-6 and potentially halt progression of COVID-19-mediated lung damage and death. The
Company is also evaluating the utility of nasally-administered foralumab to reduce inflammation in
lungs and improve respiratory function in COVID-19 patients in an investigator’s trail in Brazil in Q4
2020."
Bottom of p49 - clinical data from Brazil trial available by end of 2020.
"Evaluate the safety and clinical utility of nasally-administered Foralumab for treatment of
cytokine-storm induced lung inflammation in COVID-19 patients in an investigator-driven clinical
trial to be conducted in Brazil in Q4 2020. The collaborative clinical study will investigate
nasally administered Foralumab either alone or in combination with orally administered
dexamethasone in COVID-19 patients. In view of the importance and urgency, scientific teams
at the Harvard Medical School, Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Santos Hospital (Jabaquara,
Santos, Brazil) and at the Company are closely collaborating to facilitate initiation of this study
in expedited time frames. This clinical trial will be coordinated by the team at INTRIALS, a
leading, full-service Latin America Clinical Research Organisation, (CRO) based in Sao Paulo
City, Brazil. The clinical data from this trial is expected to be available by the end of 2020."