Member Info for PJT12

Yes, I'm sure they're falling over themselves in the race......................

ShearClass asked the following question back in March. The same thing put me off investing in what is undoubtedly an interesting company, at least until it's answered in some shape or form. He / she starts with a para from the interims:

"There are clearly risks outside of the Group's control, including challenges to contracting new energy supply contracts in the current market environment and timing of customer decisions on Energy Efficiency contracts and installations. However, on balance, and given the full period contribution from UtilityTeam and the strength of the Group's pipeline of opportunities, the Board expects to trade in line with the current market expectations for FY22."

What happens if they can't contract new energy supply at a competitive price?

Balgio, your honesty is striking in a sea of BS elsewhere on this board. Well done to those who GENUINELY made a killing here today.

Read this part after the one below as this is Part 2. Apologies for the confusion. A highly knowledgeable AGL poster from another board, Sicilian_Kan, posted the following compelling read:

An Abbott takeover offer struck shortly after FDA approval (which would give them the corporate green light to spend money) is in my view a real and distinct possibility. Abbott will already have done large amounts of the DD required through the collaboration on MBC and they will now already have evidence of the wider commerciality of Parsortix as Angle are getting contracts in with repeat business including a Phase 3 trial, all before CLIA and FDA approval. When Abbott have a such a significant deficiency in such a key sector going forwards (liquid biopsy market) would they really, as a $208bn company want to stick to just being involved in one subsector of MBC testing and then be content with that, letting other companies dominate this field? Or would they want the whole company to get a powerful position within the wider liquid biopsy market, also enabling them to tie up and sell through companies like Exact Sciences etc. leveraging their investment beyond just expanding their current market. As I say, this is all speculation, but it is in my view well founded speculation. Nothing would surprise me and the directors are loaded up to the hilt with options. In particular, if Abbott came in with an offer for Angle after FDA approval I would not at all be surprised. And in my view, this would have to be somewhere between £5-£10 to have any chance of success. And such a price is really just a drop in the ocean for Abbott. It would be petty change for them to do a deal. Abbott is generating cash that it is sitting on. In 2019, cash was $3.8bn. In 2020, cash was $6.8bn. In 2021, cash was $9.8bn. They could buy Angle at a price many shareholders would be happy with, just from a fraction of the increase in their cash balance this year. No guarantees of course, but why would they not?

A highly knowledgeable AGL poster from another board, Sicilian_Kan, posted the following compelling read:
"Remember that Abbott Laboratories is not your normal pharma. It specialises in in "diagnostics, medical devices, nutrition and branded generic pharmaceuticals". Despite being valued at $208bn, and despite specialising in medical diagnostics and devices, you might be surprised to know that Abbott Laboratories have no real liquid biopsy foothold. If you google "liquid biopsy" and "Abbott Laboratories", the first two things that come up on the google search are the collaboration between Angle and Abbott, even without including Angle's name in the search. Next, if you look at Abbott's annual report, the words "liquid biopsy" "ctdna" AND "ctc" appear nowhere. In short, when it comes to this critical current and forward looking area of medical diagnostics and devices (liquid biopsies) Abbott is in the dark ages. In this important sector (and I do not suggest anything wider than that) Abbott are at risk of being IBM in the days of Microsoft, Apple, Google, Facebook and Nvidia. They are at risk of having missed the boat in one of the largest new areas of medical science. So it is no wonder that Abbott want to be involved in the liquid biopsy space and they have already collaborated with Angle on the MBC trial that is the bedrock of the FDA application. We are also being told by Berenberg and other established sources that FDA approval should kick off an "Abbott breast cancer partnership", "which should translate into a prompt monetary benefit". We also know from the Finncap report that "Although there is no commercial agreement with Abbott as yet, testing of CTCs for HER-2 could provide Abbott with a repeat test for HER-2 giving a 4x increase in use of their PathVysion test; creating a market worth c.$2bn." (note this would be an annual market) Investing in Angle by way of a partnership giving exclusivity in just one nice sector within a sector (HER-2 / FISH testing in MBC), could therefore give Abbott a very, very healthy return on their investment. But why would they want to stop there, in such a niche area?" 2/2

But all that's in here!
https://webcast.openbriefing.com/angle-ap22/player/?player_id=47019

"tax"

.........and a £5 million tac clawback.

..............not to mention a growing commercialization income.

https://webcast.openbriefing.com/angle-ap22/player/?player_id=47019

https://webcast.openbriefing.com/angle-ap22/

From Sicilian_Khan elsewhere: From a Berenberg broker note out today: “We continue to expect ANGLE’s Parsortix to gain FDA clearance for the harvesting of circulating tumour cells (CTCs) from metastatic breast cancer patients within H122” Even better - flesh on the bones evidencing their confidence “In our discussions, management stated that the procedure is moving beyond technical questions and into the administrative part of the process, with constructive dialogue between ANGLE and the FDA remaining regular and ongoing.” “In addition, several key partnerships and contracts should kick off following FDA clearance (eg Abbott breast cancer partnership), which should translate into a prompt monetary benefit.”

From Berenberg: "“In our discussions, (AGL) management stated that the procedure is moving beyond technical questions and into the administrative part of the process, with constructive dialogue between ANGLE and the FDA remaining regular and ongoing.”

Your most sensible post so far today, Altube.

Dow 34k, Nex 240

2019 - Covid? War in Ukraine? You "figured" these?

altube, I agree that this well run company is under-valued but the markets are not as inflated as they were in 2019.

It is how you express said "opinion" that can inflate a problem. I'll leave it there.

And, of course, the government never employs Barristers for legal advice before launching into a case like this. Your arrogance merely antagonizes the situation.

"Knowing how civil servants work in the main, they are very inefficient and will have made huge mistakes...."

It probably will get to court if you continue to annoy them with stupid comments like that.

"In addition, in order to assist in financing pipeline opportunities alongside the Company's existing debt facility and accordion facility, the Board is also seeking Shareholder authority to disapply pre-emption rights over 400,000,000 new Ordinary Shares or new C Shares, in aggregate (the "New Shares")."

Short version: "Shareholders in a company will often benefit from ‘pre-emption rights’. These give existing shareholders first refusal when a company is issuing new shares."

Explained further here:
https://www.informdirect.co.uk/shares/what-are-shareholder-pre-emption-rights/#:~:text=%20Private%20and%20public%20companies%20can%20instead%20disapply,The%20directors%E2%80%99%20justification%20of%20that%20amount.%20More%20