Member Info for StarBright

As discussed many times, the figures reported for Buys and Sells are driven by an algorithm making an estimate. On a volatile day like yesterday there is substantial scope for inaccuracy.

No conspiracy theories ("Is the drop MM manufactured?" etc) are needed to explain yesterday's price action!

I think you are correct Deas999, but from a valuation perspective the sustainable EBITDA level is what matters. This is what Soder has used in his BoE valuation, and I think it is the right approach.

RNS looks good to me, mainly because they've chosen to lay out the boundaries of the dispute in a way which removes uncertainty. A brave decision by the company that I applaud.

The underlying figures (even ex dispute) are extraordinary. Very rarely will you own shares in a company that reports sequential revenues of £12m, £11m, £277m. Earnings (post tax etc as properly defined) are close to 50%, with cash-generation as clean-as-a-whistle.

Wow.

We should also acknowledge that the guidance shared on revenue and retained margins per test (€3-€4, €1-€2) is well below expectations expressed here consistently.

There is a slight irony in the fact that we are being kept in an extended lockdown by a virus whose prevalence is such that our government can't provide samples to healthcare companies working to provide diagnostics...

AS quotes the results of a two hundred person survey. Is it possible that this just isn’t enough to provide the evidence the government needs to go ahead with a test or tests effectively bearing their explicit approval? I suspect that the hurdles required have been materially increased in height and frequency during the last six months. I make no comment as to whether this is right or wrong, I’m just saying I can see how difficulties and risks have mounted.

Yes it is. 180p looks like a good level to buy - as long as you have some appetite for SP volatility.

Impatience hasn't worked for me. My original order 179.9p would have been hit. Tut tut tut....

@Watching2: "No chance of a quote"

Just place a limit order at the price you're happy to pay. Far more likely to get hit.

All the "...can't get a quote / NT to buy..." stuff posted here really is nonsense. Volume is high and bi-directional. There's no reason for trades not be executed. And posting that stuff because you think it'll somehow help the SP is more than a little desperate. If you want to trade AVCT in size upto 20k shares, the door is wide open.

Unusually for me impatience bit and I adjusted my limit, adding 15k at just under 182p. Thank you sellers.

FWIW I am a buyer below 180p. Order is in.

I'm looking forward to what I expect will be an interesting presentation. However, everyone should understand that the presentation won't (in fact can't) include concrete news on topics like orders, because that would place the company in breach of its disclosure obligations.

As always, market participants will react to the tone of what is said though. I am hoping to hear some colour on the apparent delays in the DHSC process. If such comments were general - ie not company specific - they might be outside of disclosure obligation territory while still being meaningful in terms of investor sentiment etc.

...are nearly always complete nonsense. And sometimes I can't resist calling them out as such.

This however might be one of the rare occasions when the idea that MM's like to top up their books with cheap stock ahead of a news event has some validity. The setup is close to perfect. Don't be surprised if price action today continues to be "interesting" and includes a swing to the positive.

Myles is simply talking his book. Nothing wrong with that!

He produces some great research / analysis pieces, and sometimes posts opinions and hopes. I think he's always been pretty transparent about which is which. I welcome his contributions.

I like the idea that fewer shares equates to great(er) dividend returns.

Please cut my pizza in 12 slices. If you cut it in 8 it won't be enough and I'll still be hungry after eating it.

So there's no evidence then?

Is there some evidence to show that "shorting scum" are having an impact on ODX's share price?

FCA short position tracker shows no short positions. The major spreadbet firms aren't opening new long positions, let alone shorts.

It will be interesting to see what Alien says about the tailings project. As discussed on this 'board previously, the seller (Wombat) is owned by another company called Sorrento Resources. Tom Winnifrith's article says that some of Alien's directors have historic and possibly present links with one or both of these companies, and asks whether there are undisclosed related-party deal(s) here. I don't think the company needs to respond publicly to the Winnifrith piece, but they should perhaps use any scheduled update to confirm unequivocally that everything is in order.

The idea that company CEO's deliberately time RNS announcements to impact the activities of traders is laughable for anyone who has been involved in running a quoted company.

To have a short gang, surely there needs to be a short position? The FCA daily short positions report shows nothing for UFO. In contrast for HURR (where there is short activity) https://shorttracker.co.uk/company/GB00B580MF54/

The major speadbet companies will not open short positions on volatile AIM shares, because of new margin requirements imposed by their own prime brokers. In many cases, they won't even open long positions, never mind shorts. The idea that "short gangs" have a material impact on UFO's SP is a fantasy, and the many posts about it here can be safely disregarded.

The truth is that related party transactions pose a far greater threat to investors than "short gangs". They are a prime mechanism for value to extracted by insiders, and subject to stringent regulatory oversight as a result. Questions about apparent relationships between the parties involved in several of Alien's transactions have been discussed here in recent weeks. Only yesterday there was debate here about who the owners of Windfield (the seller of interests in the Hammerseley Project) are. My repeated observation is that posters here do not read RNS carefully enough, the small details really matter. You really must DYOR and evaluate all information critically.