Member Info for Sangijuelas1

One of the biggest holdings is Aiven. The most recent NAV of 730 has them written down to a value of about 2.4bn dollars. This could still be a bit high but maybe not by that much.

They have a publicly listed comparator in Confluent. At peak bubble they were valued at close to 30bn but are now down to 8bn. This is on a multiple of about 12 of sales to price.

Both companies deliver data infrastructure services on the cloud, and cloud companies were battered a year or so back but cloud spend has been recovering fairly rapidly and their is an additional use case for their services involving streaming data from Generative AI.

Aiven posted revenue of 67m Euro for 2022 but this was almost double the previous year. So I think it's fair to assume 100m plus dollar revenue for 2023. So a multiple of 12 to that would give value of 1.2bn so contribute to a NAV of 365.

Confluent is still seen as suffering from market lack of confidence in small cap tech stocks. Once they break even they could get back over 10bn, which would again make Aiven's valuation seem a lot more realistic.

As would Aiven getting revenue closer to 200bn

Alas, most investment trusts hold listed equities so price discovery of the assets is a constant.

Here the valuations making up the NAV are based on funding rounds and comparisons with similar companies that are listed. So a much higher degree of subjectivity involved.

Other than Graphcore, which of the core portfolio companies do you see as distressed?

As for Graphcore I have said previously I expect this to be written down to zero. They will either run out of cash or be bought for pennies or the fundraise would be swerved by MV. They say they need a billion dollars for the next 2-3 years and I don't think MV have 50m to chuck at them, so their holding would be worthless due to massive dilution.

I suspect they were written down to about £10m at the interims as there was reference to a £30m write down from 2 companies.

Graphcore are regular tweeters but they have posted nothing since New Year, which is a long time for them to be quiet.

Maybe lights are off.

In

Funds typically vote stuff through even if they don't like it.

This stock is not exactly liquid. Dumping by the Border to Coast Pension fund and BG have caused a 15% drop.

There is a risk here because if the SP doesn't recover they would consider delisting it , especially if the price is vulnerable to a buyer.

That would render all the LTIP options worthless, which are currently massively underwater.

Going through the recent Form 3s I can see that almost 80% is held by funds including the 14% held by the UK and Irish government vehicles.

In addition to Baillie Gifford a number of other funds have been reducing since the dilution including Borders Pension and Schroders. Interestingly, Lionrock increased their position prior to the dilution news and since then have cut by nearly 1%.

Some of the reductions may be result of fund withdrawals by their clients but definitely sense some dissatisfaction on their part given the recent goings on.

These funds still have significant holdings so this is of some concern if they need to continue reducing.

The company is deeply indebted. A debt funded share buyback would not be prudent.

Anyway, they need to get exits from their current positions, not increase exposure to them.

They have also stated several occasions they aren't going to do that.

Baillie Gifford look like the seller.

One or more of the fund managers didn't like the recent acquisition and subsequent dilution of NAV

And no doubt cash best held back as will surely drop back further

Well clearly someone is selling out. And as usual there are no buyers.

And if the context was different, for example, if it was possible to fund struggling companies through low interest government loans, it could all be a completely different proposition.

Instead all that is in play are market forces where some would be happy to let Angle fail and buy Parsortix from the administrators.

Exactly Bantham. More marketing Comms directed at retail shareholders, who are least well placed to evaluate the risks and opportunities.

So many LTHs are in way over their head's and the Telegram group is full of stories of people telling family members to invest based on their own research supported by stuff like this Trinity note.

The government seems to go to great lengths to protect the public from crypto products but it's fine for small scale retail investors to over expose themselves to pipe dreams.

Sandy, I meant the initial application that was not the De Novo pathway

The SP over 100p was really a bubble caused by speculation about the prospect of successful FDA clearance.

The risk reward balance is just not viable.

At an SP of 34p that's a market cap of £85m, which is nearly 13x projected revenue.

Potential pathways to accelerated revenue growth have had to be put on hold due to the current fallback on bootstrapping through lack of cash.

So all that's really on the table is double or nothing, which is not what I am looking for.

Oh and of course they initially went down the wrong DDA approval pathway, which set things back quite a bit.

Have to wonder why that was as there are plenty of consultants firms that help companies prepare submissions.

With this track record it's hard to have any faith that they will get things right in the future.

Now they have pivoted to dropping everything except trying to attract pharma services and NGS partner.

It is very hard to view Angle as a serious long term buy and hold proposition. For a start, it would be foolish to attempt to buy and hold if there is very little certainty around the company's ability to remain a going concern in future.

I personally, am not happy to write off an investment at the outset, which would be the sensible thing to do. I prefer to invest in companies with a higher probability of not going bust. Put simply, you can't buy and hold for the long term (10 years) if there's a strong chance the company could fail or face another massive dilution.

The company have made multiple mistakes over the last few years, which has contributed to them burning through so much capital.

1) They spent an initial £3.7m on some IP for CTC analysis in 2017. In addition to the IP they took on a lab in Canada with 8 staff until the lab and analysis tool (Hycead) were eventually dumped last year.

2) According to an RNS they allocated £7m to the prostate cancer trial with Midlantic Urology. Nothing to show for this where apparently the samples collected are being stored in a freezer until they can decide on a method of analysing them.

3) They also invested in a lab in the US touting it as a post FDA route to getting the lab approved by the Federal Government. This lab has now been axed so more cash burn with no positive result.

4) And it has to be said that the jury is still out on whether all the time and funding allocated to getting FDA De Novo clearance was actually worth it. This has not provided the acceleration in revenues that Newland was predicting and it remains to be seen whether this was necessary given that alternative methods of CTC capture are being used in pharma services without this clearance.

These are just a few of the mistakes that have been made along the way and burnt through investors capital. No doubt there are more that I have forgotten or am not aware of.

I am sure others could increase the list!

And again - live prices showing massive spread of 14p but actual quotes still have sell 1p above buy

For about 5 minutes, back to normal now

Quotes for sell 262 and to buy 260!