Member Info for sir_digby

They passed the 4% on Monday so it's entirely possible they've already passed 5%.

Board should have worked harder at attracting institutions .

Imo the buying is unsanctioned, the board is probably at as much of a loss as us.

They're probably more concerned with how it's going to pay off for them as they are a country mile short of the ltip basement price so no pay day for them if an offer was made sub 350p.

They're buying on the open market, regardless of their intentions 4% will get them nowhere. They'll need at least 10% to even discuss putting Someone on the board.

Least surprising news this week.

The rise in cases in Hong Kong have almost 100% been sequenced as ba.2. China struggled to contain ba.1 locking down entire cities, they won't contain ba.2, too transmissible. Almost 20% of the global population is about to be exposed to it for the first time (if you believe their zero covid claims) and sinovac is assessed as next to useless against omicron.

As title

I'm not convinced that the buying by biosynex was foreknowledge for the board. They were notified on the 14th so why not drop the RNS pre open on the 15th or am instead of waiting till 1600. I imagine our CEO spent his day on the dog and bone trying to find out WTF was going down. Could be a few twitchy @rses on our board, a country mile short of the base ltip target and a direct competitor has just become your largest shareholder. Christ, they may actually have to work for their bonuses.

Latest study (preprint) of ba.2.

Tldr > more transmissible and more pathogenic than ba.1

So much for 'its getting milder'

https://twitter.com/SystemsVirology/status/1493772014615949313?t=1XbxBygyzzW3AdhAKtSoJA&s=19

Bear in mind there is £73m (inc vat) worth of unpaid invoices and the small matter of a further £30m in inventory that was built up on the instructions of the DHSC now written off. If our contractual rights are as strong as we've been led to believe then we would still be valued below cash.

We shouldn't delude ourselves into thinking that biosynex don't have a better handle on what's going on there than us, regardless of NDAs.

Takeover or not, at least someone sees value at this level.

If biosynex go hostile then the bod have their work cut out. They have almost zero institutional support and any offer below the base price for ltip @354p sees them gain nothing from the deal as I understand it. Bet they become a whole lot more engaging on the RNS front now.

Even at that price I'd see most shareholders still underwater and would likely be rejected if put to a vote.

On a positive note, biosynex must have formed an opinion that we have a significant chance of resolving the DHSC dispute on favourable terms. So there's that at least.

I suspect the board is as bemused as us, cushy number up for our non-communicative management. I wonder how their ltip arrangement would be impacted if there was a takeover approach. Once again they have to come crawling to PIs.

Well there's no significant holders for them to tap up to get a controlling holding so this could get interesting.

So, what's occuring here?

https://twitter.com/Gab_H_R/status/1491958554240114712?t=wivLNyMvA2lrkAkEwqaqvA&s=19

This is probably of more immediate concern, ba.2 with additional h78y mutation. Makes up over 20% of sequences in Denmark and making ground on og ba.2 which in turn is 30-40% more transmissible than ba.1. h78y is associated with inflammation, not something you'd want for your lungs.

The dangers of giving unfettered replication space to a virus already facing selection pressures in a heavily vaccinated population, whatever flourishes is going to be fitter than a butchers dog.

Check out Israel , booster program started 6 months ago. Record cases, hospitalizations , ICU on the rise and heading for record Deaths based on that. Increasing prevalence of ba.2 there.

No human to human transmission, nothing to worry about . Also H5n6, been a few cases in China recently similar mortality rate but human transmission rare, all cases traced to poultry contact

His exact words were 'very strong grounds ', as CEO he will know his words carry weight and unlike us he has access to all information. It's his dispute now, he had every opportunity to row the boards stance back.

Care to guess how much money HMG has recovered from PPE and test suppliers so far? Some of which have been out and out scams with PPE literally rotting in containers and absolute testing failures by providers. The sum total of almost bugger all after 2 years yet people expect us to just roll over and refund for goods supplied in good faith and independently validated by the DHSC themselves prior to the contract being issued.

If there's been a material defect with some of the assays then there was a warranty clause allowing for replacement.

If the DHSC s issue was that the process was too convoluted for some under pressure labs then, once again, they validated the product. As for accusations of us massaging the results, great, prove it. Both immensa and Randox ballsed up big time, much bigger than anything raised in the PE article, yet still doing business with the DHSC as are we.

They'll be battling over a compromise about the outstanding invoices and the inventory we built up on their instructions.

You're right it's disgraceful, Probably why the FDA are considering criminal charges against innova for falsifying and plagiarising their clinical data in their FDA application because they have actual evidence. Whereas PE have an undisclosed source who has presented no evidence against NCYT, no action has been taken against the company and their products remain for sale and in use around the world.

Interesting (to me).

RNS yesterday. We have strong grounds to assert our contractual rights.

Proactive interview. We have VERY strong grounds to assert our contractual rights.

I'm not one to over analyse every word uttered but I find it hard to believe he would insert that word without justification as there is an important distinction between the two assertions and I doubt he misspoke. He also made direct reference to leveraging our considerable cash at hand, something Mullis never did.