Member Info for RegulatorUK

Those aren't saliva swabs. They are oropharyngeal and nasal swabs.

I should add you need to look at the Product Attributes and Authorised Settings to work out which is which.

"I was wondering if anyone knew if lateral flow tests have been rolled out in the usa by any company/state on a large scale so far?"

Yes - the FDA has a list of those that have been given an EUA.

https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/mcm-legal-regulatory-and-policy-framework/emergency-use-authorization#covidinvitrodev

The tests are classed a classed as clinical procedures and therefore require consent.

That said, even if the parent refuses to consent, there's nothing to stop the child (anyone under the age of 18 in these circumstances) consenting in their own right, as long as those administering the test are satisfied they understand what they are consenting to (the Gillick Competence test).

I'm willing to place money I could guess what sort of parents are withholding consent...

"So you are saying Walbrook are wrong about 30 days but it’s a mute point because the government aren’t bothering to follow legal procedure and disclose contract details within the timeframes stipulated (whether it is 20 or 30 days) anyway. Correct?"

Basically, yes. It is something of a moot point. But we know some people will use the failure of DHSC to publish the CAN:

(a) on time; and,
(b) with the correct level of detail

to try and bash ODX (we all know who they'll be). Hence me emphasising that I wouldn't read anything in to it. This is DHSC's failing - not ODX's.

"Is there anything preventing ODX publishing it?"

ODX cannot publish the Contract Award Notice. That has to be done by the purchasing organisation.

It's also worth noting that the onus is on the central government department/ALB to publish the CAN - not ODX.

"Why are Walbrook agreeing to 30 days ?"

Probably because they're going on what's in the media. This stuff is my day job.

You can find the Government's guidance on the "Publication of Central Government Tenders and Contracts" here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/666728/Guidance_Publication_of_New_Central_Government_Tender_documents__and_Contracts_2017__1___1_.pdf

Section 9.1 is the relevant section. This place a greater burden on central government functions than the Public Contracts Regulations 2015.

The reality is that we know DHSC and associated bodies are continuing to fail to publish Contract Award Notices in line with the guidance (and the law) and that what is being published is often inconsistent with the transparency required. Hence why I wouldn't read anything into a CAN not being published by the correct deadline (or even the one next week)

"This is just an amuse bouche..... the main course is coming..... latest next week according to Govt Contract transparency rules...

https://twitter.com/MartinWillock/status/1366714069936459778?s=19 "

Actually, if the contract was awarded on 11 February, when ODX RNSed it, then the Contract Award Notice should be published tomorrow, as it wasn't subject to competitive procurement with a standstill period. In such cases it's 20 days from contract award rather than 30 days.

*TB not TC...

I shall continue to top up as cash becomes free.

People may not like TC - but what is clear is that BRH knows it's investments and will maximise the return.

"Regulator I have put you on filter for being either another troll or a pedantic richard head.

I would suggest others do likewise.

@uxm484 keep up the good work"

Oh dear... I'm devastated and weeping copiously.

:rollseyes:

"They performed maintenance last night and released an update to the app recently. I had to update the app this morning to get logged in. Hope this helps."

I reinstalled the app and it's still not working.

"There could have been a statement saying “the revenue from this contract could be as high as ...”

If they'd done so, then we'd be back to the daft claims being made on AIM BBs day in, day out, when people can't tell the difference between a potential contract value (i.e. expressed over the lifetime of the contract, including any potential extensions) and a fixed volume contract.

"I think we need to look at market segmentation here now also. In essence ODX now have a distribution partner for a completely different market segment (ELISA antibody, likely quantitative test compared to LFT qualitative) and can expect the partner to focus on marketing activities for this whilst they focus on the LFTs."

Yep - absolutely. And don't forget that just a few weeks/months ago, many people were writing off the ELISA aspect of the portfolio.

"I want to see signed contracts and sales figures."

You're going to be sorely disappointed then, as you'll have to wait for the normal financial reporting...

"Like it or not, the reason Omega didn’t mention the potential value of the contract is because it’s not big."

Or, as has previously been pointed out, it's a not fixed volume contract - therefore there isn't a value as such to report.

"RegulatorUK, the email will be monitored by aides who filter and pass on to Ministers those of most important. That is why Ministers have their own private offices and staff. Oliver Dowden and Grant Shapps are both in need of something to lift their status and profile

Nothing ventured, nothing gained is my motto."

As someone who has worked in and alongside Whitehall for the last 25 years, I do know how the system works...

@ uxm484

You need to tailor your trolling posts...

Oh dear.... quoting ADVFN as if it were some reliable source. Both pathetic and laughable...