Member Info for sir_digby

So the underlying cost is 20-25 quid and the likes of randox and Biograd charge around 50. Hardly extortion for people indulging in leisure travel in the midst of a global pandemic. The travel industry don't give a sh@t about anything other than asses on seats. Nothing stopping them from setting up their own testing services and charging 30 if they're that concerned.

And just in case anyone thinks that oxford nanopore have some sort of special relationship with the DHSC that we don't. It's reported they had their contract cancelled back in April.

Around 34.5 quid valJu.

*error on my part, should be 2.48bn gbp. Point stands though, just not quite so ludicrous.

How on earth are they getting this IPO away at that valuation?

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/oxford-nanopore-launch-34-bln-london-ipo-coming-weeks-sources-2021-09-01/

Larry having read the full resolution, they've set a floor price for any raise at a minimum of the VWAP for the previous 35 days which I'm more comfortable with. I was very concerned about institutions being brought in with a heavily discounted placing to our detriment.

Porky, ref 6 yes that's how I've read it any shares to be issued to employees can oly be issued from those held as a result of buyback. Also worth noting that the buyback resolution is front and centre, not tucked away at the bottom.

I see in the 20th resolution they're attempting to double the ceiling for capital raises from 10 to 20% of the share capital. Saw that coming a mile off.

AGM resolutions should be available in the investors section of the company's site, if not, why not.

BYP add to that EKF, mcap 370m and 20m cash on a pe of 33. Pretty much all of their profits coming as a result of COVID-19. The dispute is hanging over us killing sentiment that's why we are where we are.

While the dispute rumbles on they can't make any acquisitions etc. The cash we have is ring fenced in the unlikely event we have to refund the DHSC.

I personally feel the chances of that happening are remote, even more so when taking into account they came back for more promate. However, it still remains a possibility.

I can't for one moment believe the company would have taken the DHSC off of 'stop' in terms of supply if they didn't have good reson to believe an outcome to the resolution was on the horizon. It would be monumentally naive, their need for the product was a valuable bargaining chip.

I'll be paying particular attention to any attempt to raise the headroom for capital raises, currently at 10%

There's no institutional interest (which to be blunt is the fault of the bod failing to sell themselves to the city) and I'm suspicious they may attempt to bring them onboard with a fund raise under the guise of an acquisition. I'm not against the concept of a capital raise to fund an acquisition but current shareholders shouldn't be shafted by a discounted issue to do it.

I'm not worried about remuneration based solely on the hope that the BOD have any self awareness. They know they have zero chance of passing one, their problem, should have worked harder to bring those institutions on board.

42k reported today, not a great position to be in with English schools, colleges etc returning next week. Hospitalizations now over 7.5k as well. It seems sticking your head in the sand and ignoring it didn't work out to be quite the winning strategy the government expected it to be. Now Afghanistan is off the front page let's see how they try to spin it.

It gets worse when you consider they came back for yet more product. You have to assume that resolution is close otherwise what on earth are we doing allowing a debtor who owes us 74m access to yet more product?

Perhaps people might like to take this tedious cr@p over to twitter where you both have accounts, we know your thoughts on porky, you've repeated them ad nauseum every time you interact with this board. It's beginning to look like deliberate disruption.

This is coming from the perspective of someone who doesn't even read Porky's posts.

Institutions selling? There's none left, 2% of the company is in institutional hands. Probably explains why it's up and down like a hooker's draws.

The US will be red listed by Europe for travel from tomorrow, why they haven't already is baffling.

That's exactly what these articles are aimed to do, it's simply lobbying by the travel industry. The same industry would happily dump thousands daily at our airports with no testing at all, precisely the reason we've ended up with the delta variant.

We are in the midst of a global pandemic with less than a quarter of the global population having even seen one shot of vaccine. Overseas leisure travel is the literal definition of a luxury. Luxuries come with premiums attached.

Get rid of the cowboys and make rapid PCR more available, we all know it's perfectly achievable but for the industry to make the investment there has to be at least some future visibility of earnings to justify it.

Of course we are in a closed period, the company is potentially owed 74m by the DHSC, settlement would net around 40m additional cash taking into account the 20m provision and vat, it has significant implications for the company's growth plans. Only three days ago you were predicting 1000p-1100p by Xmas, the data hasn't changed since then, yet you've halved your target.

For some reason this got lost this morning, the tests currently in use by the DHSC fail on pretty much every metric yet given another eua extension.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/lateral-flow-validation-prioritisation-criteria-for-rapid-diagnostic-assays-for-specific-sars-cov-2-antigens

Poidster, would it be right to assume that the Promate supplied earlier in the year (expected to last through 2021) was the replacement for the snp SIG? Which they have now ran out of. If so, 4.7m worth isn't going to last long so that will have to be extended. The sensible compromise for both parties would be to settle up in promate, hence the provision I suppose then we get paid.

Although it has to be said, if there was nothing materially defective with the SNPsig then the company could stick to it's guns and demand settlement for both without making the warranty provision.

The best deals are usually when neither party is entirely satisfied though.