Member Info for shychap

I read it as a disguised profit warning by OPTI.

From today's OPTI commercial update:

"We are pleased to see an increase in the value of company's shareholding in both Probiotix Health plc and SkinBiotherapeutics and see considerable growth potential in both these assets which can potentially be disposed of to pay shareholders an ad hoc dividend or sold down to reduce the need to fundraise in a volatile market.

This means we enter 2025 with a strong balance sheet (£9.1m; 2023:£9.4m), a strong cash position (£740k; 2023: £635k) no debt, a strong first quarter order book, a solid pipeline of existing customers reordering, and new customers looking to launch our award winning products in different applications around the world. Post period the Company sold 1,211,567 SBTX shares at an average price of 20p, generating gross proceeds of £257K."

They may well be the same person but that's circumstantial evidence at best.

The trolling ban was well earned but I don't think anyone has offered any proof that he was Sheedy.

I am particularly interested in the veterinary applications of SBTX patents. Given how much we spend on pets, livestock and animal welfare, this paragraph holds much promise:

"As used herein wound healing refers to the process by which the skin repairs itself after injury. In normal skin, the epidermis (outermost layer, predominantly made up of keratinocytes) and dermis (inner or deeper layer) exists in a steady-state equilibrium, forming a protective barrier against the external environment. Once the protective barrier is broken, i.e. by wounding, the normal (physiologic) process of wound healing is immediately set in motion. As used herein the term “wound” refers to a type of injury in which the skin is torn, cut or punctured, or where the skin is damaged following a blunt force trauma or medical condition, resulting in a breach in the skin barrier. The probiotic bacteria or lysates thereof according to the invention may be useful in wound healing in vivo, including tissue repair, regeneration and/or replacement. For example, they may be used in healing scar tissue, acceleration of wound healing, or where tissue grafts such as skin grafts are used....

The patient to be treated may be any animal or human. The patient is preferably a non-human mammal, or a human patient."

Interestingly, there also appear to be cosmetic applications in the animal world.

https://patents.justia.com/patent/20230088050

"Good luck. I'm filtering you."

Not at all sure why I should care about that PGlancy. Nor why you feel the need to make an announcement about it.

I'm old enough and ugly enough to look after myself. I've seen plenty of attempted manipulation in other forums and they mostly fail because people attack messengers instead of focusing on the message. Arguing/guessing about people's motives for posting is a waste of time. We should be talking about the stock, not the identity of the poster.

PGlancy, I don't know the history, nor do I want to know it. I respond if I consider a post to be valid...but will ignore everything else. I also welcome contrarian views as I think it's prudent to be a devil's advocate on all stocks.

I have only been invested here for a few months but I realise that some posters may be carrying baggage from having invested on previous spikes. They are still entitled to their opinion – although not to down out the forum with spam – but SBTX is a very different investment proposition today from the pre-Croda times.

And I'm not saying "Don't sell". Every shareholder should do what's right for them at the time, selling or top-slicing if it makes sense. Ronald Wayne doesn't regret selling his Apple shares for $800 in 1990 which would have been worth $290bn today.

Not all research leads to patents and not all patents are worth a fortune. But I commented recently on the unusually high number of citations for the O'Neil/McBain patent on lysates in cosmetics and that suggests that they have hit paydirt.

Https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-86914-y

It is always important to study RNS's carefully, not only to analyse what is being said but also to consider what might have been omitted. Bulls and bears speculate in equal numbers on the BBs.

It is clearly my speculation that Croda would have tested the water with major customers before committing to the SBTX agreement. It would be surprising to me if they had not done that.

RNS's are certainly highly regulated – that's why every PLC must have an approved/licensed Nomad. But while an RNS must be truthful/factual, it isn't obligatory to include everything that we would like to know. And nor must it include information which is subject to an NDA.

Any RNS which is subsequently found to contain misleading or untrue statements could lead to prosecutions under the Market Abuse Regulations. Equally, any company news which is materially price sensitive must be RNS'd immediately, or risk prosecution.

There is a huge difference between past SP spikes and what is happening today.

SBTX has now delivered to a huge multinational which has researched and validated the claims for our invention.

Of course, it remains to be seen how well Croda market it and how many of their customers buy it; but that is not in our hands. The probability is that Croda have pre-sold it in large quantities to key players in the industry before they even signed the deal with SBTX.

But SBTX are in an infinitely better place than they were prior to 2024 - without having racked up huge debts and liabilities to get there.

SA deserves credit. Our boffins deserve credit. We are in an enviable position.

I think it's perfectly valid to raise concerns about the possible motives for dumping SBTX shares. However, some of those big trades are buys.

There are also plenty of possible reasons for any shareholder to sell at any time.

A lot of AIM startups have to give away cheap shares in order to keep the lights on and there's always a price to pay because many of these cheap shares will be dumped as soon as a decent profit can be banked. For sure, the SP would be higher if nobody dumped but that's not how it works in pre-revenue stocks. And without those cheap shares, SBTX would very possibly not be here at all and on the cusp of a transformative breakthrough.

And there are obviously more buyers than sellers so this is a great time from everyone's point of view to flush out the short-term traders.

Let's not pretend that holding onto our shares tightly is risk-free. However good the future looks, the only way to guarantee their value is to sell now.

The rest of us can take comfort from the rising SP and the sensationally good and highly regulated RNS's over the past year or so. Everything in those RNS's remains true today.

It's SIPP money but my SBTX holding is now well above £50k after the rise in the past few weeks - second only to NEXS in my portfolio which is so sleepy that the SP goes up/down every time someone buys/sells a couple (I'm anticipating a takeover otherwise it's a lobster pot).

There's plenty of feel-good fuzzy aspirations in the report but nothing which I could nail down as specific to Skin. Lysates don't rate a mention. And they say that nothing has happened since the year end which needs to be reported to shareholders.

"The coming 25 years are set to see significant shifts in

consumer care, pharmaceuticals, and agriculture – the

main markets that we serve. Driven by the rise of artificial

intelligence, the demand for sustainable ingredients and

advances in biologics and biotechnology, the specialty

chemicals industry will undergo a transformation that will

fundamentally alter how we develop, manufacture and

supply chemical ingredients. We are clear about our role

in that transformation and recognise that it will require us

to embrace innovation and collaboration more than ever

before, adapting our thinking, cultures and approaches."

Shareholders get nothing - although Nat Le Roux has managed to get 20% of the new operation.

Infrastructure construction specialist Balfour Beatty SP rose this morning after the company posted an 11% rise in underlying annual earnings.

Some institutions/HNW individuals buy shares because they seem cheap at the placing price and their only objective is to bank, say, a 100% ROI. These people aren't investors and they couldn't care less where the share price is heading as long as they make their target profit, sell out and move on.

Others are cornerstone investors who buy shares because they see considerable upside over the longer term. They hope to do a lot better than doubling their money and their target exit price can increase as a company meets or exceeds expectations.

There are also forced sellers: shareholders who need cash urgently for whatever reason and they can't afford to wait any longer even if the SP trend is rising.