Member Info for PartyPooper

The masks they are going to make have bloody great gaps all around the edges, the gaps are not anti-viral, the stats show FFP3 to be very effective, my dad went into a Covid ward with pneumonia recently, for 2 weeks, he tested negative and remained negative until they discharged him, there's nothing wrong with the existing PPE, cost is king and masks are only part of the story.

Sharebel Nowhere in any NHS documentation will you find a classification named "gold standard"
Coronavirus is not being spread in the setting where IIR masks are used, P2F masks will be uncompetitive. The rest of your assertions are nonsense, they would require a complete re-write of current policy.
https://www.rdash.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/appendix-47-surgical-face-mask-ffp3.pdf
Let me know when that's been re-written, I'd be happy to give it a read and have my opinion changed.

Are you trying to attach logic to the approach of this government lol
I think this will be a success story but the sales will be mainly retail for the mask they will be manufacturing, obviously things can develop with respect to that.

When you pull a mask off you do it via straps, they will not be anti-viral on the P2F mask, as for disposing of them, there's a tonne of stuff they have to handle covered in the virus, it's all about procedures. The type of mask being manufactured by P2F will not replace FFP3 or FFP2, the cost will mean it doesn't replace the disposables all IMO.
I see this as a retail product for the foreseeable.

"The need for FFP3 Mask (oral nasal disposable mask respiratory protection) to be worn is identified through clinical risk assessment. The mask is used to protect against respiratory borne pathogens. To use these masks, relevant staff must be ‘face fit tested’ to ensure that they can achieve a suitable face fit of the mask and that it operates at the required efficiency.

The following documentation is used specifically in relation to face fit testing"
The NHS is very specific about using masks with a gapless face fit, IMO nothing is going to change on that so IMO it's an uphill battle there. Huge retail market out there for them but most ppl buying them would prefer a better fitting mask.

FFP3 can be had for 10p each in very small quantities so they're nowhere near on par!

I'm not trying to de-ramp here, I just think putting this tech into the same construction of mask as the 3p disposables is a big mistake, these are not going to replace FFP2 OR FFP3 and NHS is not going to pay the extra to use them in place of the cheap disposables. Decent size market in the UK for retailing these to the worried well, that's where the future sales lie IMO

@corrado999 I think Hardshell much more likely to get the NHS contracts going because they produce the FFP2 & FFP3 masks as well as the cheap disposables. P2F technology added to FFP2 or FFP3 masks would be company making product, I think the way they've gone is like turbo charging a fiat 1000. The disposables in hospitals are often worn for 20 minutes and then disposed of.

lol Just kidding, it sounds great idea

I live in York, all seems a bit of a hassle really!

&Panderman
"Surely, with this steadily rising SP it would make sense to finalise this deal(for the buyer)"
NO NO NO NO NO!
The final sale price is so far North of here that it doesn't matter, the buyer will only offer what they see as viable whatever the SP does.

@matarakz "Biden says he will ask Americans to wear masks for the first 100 days he's in office"
That's a bit like using a story about rampaging Elephants in the Serengeti as a reason to invest in a Glaswegian pea shooter factory lol

I don't think anybody would say it's risk free, if you buy shares don't panic if they drop because especially in AIM they fluctuate a lot but over time this has moved in the right direction, good luck.

In the case of this share the long term holders bought at much lower price that you will get them for so no, but you get the same price for your shares as a long term holder.

PATT now giving us PP's a bad name, a really odd time for a turd to float to the surface but I guess the cistern is filling up quickly!

The number of shares you got stays the same and the offer will be what it is regardless, unless you're brave enough to flog em and buy em back on a predicted dip just let it do what it's going to do. I'd think that the entry into the new index and tracker funds holding shares it should stabilise at the higher rates.
I sat through the 17p weeks after getting in @21p, I've done OK so far.

@paulmack I don't think any conclusion can me made from the RNS regarding it's inclusion in the final sale, they have always said work continues as normal regardless of the FSP, never heard anything different. As for the NDA they wouldn't have released the info if it was outside what was permitted, I'm sure they're not short of legal advice on that at the moment.

djm1 I'm reaching my conclusions based on what Keith told someone, that they were instructed to put it out. As far as I'm concerned that kills any other ideas of motive dead. At the end of the day, proof will be in the pud, no announcement so far, it doesn't matter, it's going to come sooner or later and these new levels are most welcome.
GLA - I have to run my business and forget this soap opera for a while :-)

@AgentB Are you taking predictions for who will end up in the hall of shame :-)

I don't think so, the 2.9 was something they had to do and the WK update was due anyway, this week is all about the new index and ppl are wanting to link all this to the fsp.