Member Info for StarBright

Bedhead - what’s the difference between Revenue and Earnings..?

Sounds good to me.

Interestingly the performance payment only applies for 24m, so easily dragged out if £££m’s are at stake...

EWT98 - the simplest way might be to reduce your £23.07m by 50% because Windfield’s former owners will recapture that portion of the upside via the performance payment mechanism. It’s a material consideration when trying to assess the merits of the deal.

Don’t forget the potential “performance payment” to Windfield. If the project is sold it will effectively dilute UFO’s return on the portion just acquired by 50%.

Hi Max. Thank you for your concern, but I haven't sold any so still have multiples of the number in your post... Still optimistic that one or more of the projects embedded within UFO will deliver a home run for shareholders.

Deanok - yes, we should expect a TR1. It will be interesting to see who the new holder is. Seems a little obtuse that they are referenced only as "...the Windfield seller..." in the RNS. As always there'll be a story behind this that we are unlikely ever to know the details of.

I think it is good news as "...the Windfield seller" (the new owner of 200m UFO shares) presumably believes that there is significant upside potential in the UFO SP. They have swapped an illiquid asset - their minority holding in the project - for a liquid one, UFO shares. Let's hope Bill struck a good deal for UFO holders. Looks like the advisers (who will likely be named at some point, because they have their own egos to feed..) have managed to create good upside potential for themselves along the way.

Need to read the RNS more carefully guys.... UFO haven't given shares to Windfield in return for their interest in the project. They've given shares to Windfield's owners in return for an 80% stake in Windfield itself. Windfield isn't our new / increased holder, the owners of Windfield are. Big difference!

It's not Windfield who will own the UFO shares issued via the placing Max. It's the current owners of Windfield. That's an important distinction.

Do you know who the owners of Windfield are?

The main risk for UFO shareholders is that whoever owns Windfield (who will be a c6% holder of UFO) is motivated to sell their 200m shares in the open market. I can't see this done as a block trade, but it would take a while at current volumes to wash through 200m. It would be good to get some more information on the identity and intent of the new shareholder.

This one is more interesting.

UFO will acquire 80% of Windfield, who own 49% of the Project in exchange for £60k, 200m new UFO shares and 50m warrants at 1.65p. If UFO subsequently disposes of Windfield or its interest in the project, a "performance payment" of 50% of any uplift will be due.

Interesting deal. Some dilution (c. 6%) and upside potential seded via the warrants and "performance payment". Very hard to judge from outside whether it's a good deal - other than for the advisers of course. Going above 51% doesn't appear to confer any operational/execution advantage for UFO, so its down to the commercials only.

And Degsycolombusmasksnewnorm is back..!

*holder not holds

Holdings RNS today is very much a technical requirement only, not a change as such. One of the NEDs was a 25% holds in an investment vehicle (Nusakan) that is realising assets. Nusakans entire 3.1% holding in Echo has been transferred "in-specie" to the NED, whose beneficial interest remains unchanged. Think of this as the holding being re-registered - the name on the Echo's share register changes, but the decision making authority doesn't.

And another easy day for investors, who need do nothing but wait.

18 people are in hospital in Bolton with coronavirus - five of whom have had one vaccine jab.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/18-people-hospital-bolton-coronavirus-20608067

MCap isn't lower because of the number of shares! It's lower simply because the market attributes a lower value to the business. Share price is the output of MCap/shares in issue. Put another way, the market doesn't value an individual share and then multiply this by shares in issue to calculate MCap. The flow is in the opposite direction...

MCap was close to £50m before the rise. That's light compared to other Dx names if you buy the idea that our government is committed to building a strategically important Dx sector domestically. That may be enough in itself to account for recent price action.

It would be useful to have two boards. One for those trying to discuss, and another for those trying to influence.

That's nothing but wishful thinking. Avg daily traded volume is around 4m shares. You'd need to assemble 5.5m to get to a TR1 level. At 15% of daily volume that's 9 days without massively moving the price, call it 10. During the last 10 days ODX has traded between 65p and 95.5p, which isn't exactly in line with the idea of it being "held back"! No-one needs a sinister conspiracy to build a position here. Everything we see in price action is consistent with normal trading in a volatile small cap.

£84k is nothing in TR1 terms! MCap is £144m so 3% is £4.3m, so 50 tickets at £84k each....

https://thumbsnap.com/cEApacZk