Ben Richardson, CEO at SulNOx, confident they can cost-effectively decarbonise commercial shipping. Watch the video here.
P00rman
"Surely if you didn't care you wouldn't respond.."
Exactly. I've posted company newsflow, fundamentals and opinions based on facts.
The fact is the company was/is being talked up. The sp has fallen back as expected.
Everyone should read the company newsflow, the fundamentals and not the jam tomorrow.
Growth has reduced significantly.
CF dumping majority of his holding is a red flag.
Questionable business model.
Some are rattled and prefer to pull the wool over reader's eyes.
The Budget is on Wed.
This is likely to be the last prior to the GE, which is due within the next 12 months.
Given the waiting lists are still high and the GE is due, I'd expect the Chancellor to announce plans and/or more money to bring the waiting lists down quickly.
This is likely to include using more private providers like TLY.
Still a long way to go to bring down NHS England waiting lists. To do so, the NHS will need to be using private providers for a lot more work.
NHS waiting lists falling but will stay above pre-Covid levels until 2030, IFS says
Length of time patients must wait for A&E care, diagnostic tests, cancer care and surgery will remain high, report predicts
"However, in sobering news for the Conservatives and Labour, the thinktank also said that whoever forms the next government will not get the waiting list back down to pre-pandemic levels by the end of the next parliament, which is likely to run until the end of 2029.
The length of time patients are forced to wait for treatments such as A&E care, diagnostic tests and cancer care, as well as planned surgery – already the worst on record – are also likely to remain frustratingly long.
In January last year the prime minister said that “NHS waiting lists will fall and people will get the care they need more quickly” was one of the five promises he asked voters to judge him by. However, he admitted recently that he had not fulfilled that promise.
The waiting list stood at 7.2m when he made the commitment but by December it had risen to 7.6m. Sunak blamed strikes by NHS staff since December 2022, which have forced hospitals to rearrange 1.4m operations and outpatient appointments.
The size of the waiting list, which covers procedures patients are waiting for under the NHS’s referral to treatment scheme, has fallen in each of the past three months, from 7.8m to 7.6m. That is primarily because hospitals have made determined efforts to tackle the backlog, for example by putting on extra sessions of surgery in the evenings and at weekends."
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/feb/29/nhs-waiting-lists-falling-but-will-stay-above-pre-covid-levels-until-2030-ifs-says
Dustofnations,
"the insinuation that having to win new contracts implies a "questionable" business model is objectively wrong "
Where have I said having to win contracts makes the business model questionable or are you making it up??
I see the 'rational debate' doesn't exist either.
I also see no one has posted any links to where they accuse me of lying. That's the problem, posters suggesting I'm lying or making up stories and twisting what I've said.
I've posted company newsflow and opinions based on facts.
Just like I did on Nano, Trmr, blnx, Byot etc - all of which inevitably crashed due to the red flags I posted.
https://www.lse.co.uk/profiles/stt1/?page=17
Re TLY, again I've posted the facts. c40% held by institutions and revenues should already be around £100m. Mcap £12m.
FatherTedCrilly
"There will be other companies, with ties to Labour, that may be looking to move into this space."
Are there? Name these other companies who have ties with Labour. What space are they looking to move into. Unless of course, you are making it all up?
"Changes in Government often result in changes of supplier."
Do they? Why, so you're saying the NHS would disappear ? What about if SNP win in Scotland, will their suppliers also change? Or NI, Republic of Ireland.
Prove you're not blatantly lying and show why a change in govn will lead to change of NHS.
Blackrhino
"rational debate gets them nowhere when dealing with a cretin"
Where's the rational debate?
I'm posting company newsflow and opinions based on those facts.
Feel free to counter the bear points/red flags.
Where have lies been posted?
The CEO does have over 7m options.
CF did dump majority of his holding.
Revenue growth has slowed significantly.
There's no evidence of significant buying/holdings by institutions in 2021, 2022, 2023 and so far this year. Where are the TR1s?
The business model is questionable. That's my opinion based on facts...
Where's the lies?
When posters resort to personal attacks and abuse, they've lost the argument.
The facts don't change just because you don't like them.
Read the company newsflow - not the talking up, jam tomorrow but the figures, which have been mentioned in TUs and results. Growth has slowed significantly. It's all there.
With such reports of growth, why would CF dump majority of his holding???
Read the company newsflow and you'll see why...
You'll all see that growth has slowed significantly over the past couple of years. In fact, there's hardly any growth. That tells me why the company is being talked up and why CF dumped majority of his holding.
There's a questionable business model.
Huge 7m options held by CEO.
No evidence of significant buying/holding by institutions.
BillB
"Octopus with 7.7m and River and Mercantile with 6.6275m."
IIs buying tiny amounts. IIs do buy in small amounts in various companies.
That's tiny compared to the size of the company, isn't it? :-)
Where's all the significant buying/holding by multiple IIs?
None in 2021, 2022, 2023.....
" we could all listen to stt1 and sell up and buy TLY!"
It doesn't bother me who you listen to. The facts are:
40% of TLY are held by IIs and some were increasing since H1.
Batterseafish,
Exactly my point.
Look at the conditions attached to the awarding of the CEO's huge 7m options. These were back dated a year and are exercisable from next year:
This tells you why I believe the company is being talked up.
"The LTIP has been designed to reward, incentivise and retainMr Khan to deliver sustainable growth for shareholders. The deemed date of award is 24 February 2022, which is the date Mr Khan was appointed CEO. Under the LTIP,Mr Khan has been awarded 7,227,273 nominal cost long term incentive options ("LTIP Options " ) over ordinary shares of £0.001 each in the Company.
Vesting of the LTIP Options is conditional upon a three-year total shareholder return ("TSR") performance against an initial 11p reference price. A portion of the LTIP Options will vest on the third anniversary of the date of award subject to the achievement of a minimum 10% CAGR TSR performance increasing on a straight-line basis to vesting in full subject to the achievement of a 22.5% CAGR TSR performance.
hxxps://polaris.brighterir.com/public/hvivo/news/rns/story/x21q5mw/export
Brumm,
"If you care to read the RNS regarding the placing (below) , you’ll see that CF and the related Directors DIDN’T SELL THE MAJORITY OF THEIR SHAREHOLDING IN ONE GO as you claim but “approximately 25% of their current shareholding”..... "so either you didn’t bother to read the RNS or you’re lying. "
You and the person who voted you up (blindly) are reading the intention of the secondary placing. The intention was to sell 25% of the holding.
Try reading the actual result of secondary placing.
CF dumped nearly 26m shares out of the around 47m he owned pre the secondary placing.
That equates to around 55% of his holding sold in 1 swoop.
In my book, 55% is > 50% so is a majority of his holding.
There you go, so no, I wasn't lying and I did read the company newsflow. It looks like you and the person who voted you up, blindly, didn't.
It helps if you keep up with the company newsflow.
result of secondary placing:
https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/hvivo/news/rns/story/xe1g9jw/export
selling 25% in 1 go would have been bad enough but selling the majority is a red flag, as far as I'm concerned.
The new facility is largely funded by existing clients. If 2 clients have largely funded the new facility then they would want preference when it comes to allocating resources. That immediately puts the pharmas competitors at a disadvantage and potential loss of customer.
The big pharmas aren't charities where they would spend millions to build a facility which would have little benefit to them. They've funded it so they themselves will be the main beneficiaries and be in a position to beat competitors.
Those competitors are unlikely to just sit still.
Hallsworthy,
"Count how many times he's said "questionable business model" and then the number of times he's explained that comment (zero)."
Are you not capable of forming your own opinion. It's like Byot, Trmr, rthm, where posters only asked questions, isn't it?
What's strange, is you post so many misleading posts on TLY. It's been proven to you that TLY don't have just 1 customer but lots, yet you spin the facts there to suit your agenda.
Your post 23rd January 15.07 on TLY.
"Over reliance on a single entity is a massive red flag,"
https://www.lse.co.uk/profiles/hallsworthy/?page=2
Why don't you stick to facts on threads you post on, like:
TLY
c40% held by IIs,
around £100m revenues
Mcap around £12m
Polb zero revenue
mcap around £50m
HVO £56m revenue
mcap around £178m
Trout,
That backs exactly what I have been saying. Investors are moving between HVO and Polb and vice versa. They're not new investors but the same ones.
Polb has zero revenues. Read the latest AR for yourselves.
Brumm
"not necessarily a red flag. Look at Ryanair for example which was IPO in 1997. Mitchael O'Leary, the CEO used to own 18% of the airline then. Over the years, he has been steadily reducing his stake to 3.9% today."
"Not necessarily". I agree it's not necessarily a red flag in normal circumstances.
O'learly reduced his holding from 18% to 3.9% over 27years!!. That is quite normal and completely different from what has happened here.
CF dumped the majority of his holding in ONE go!! He bought 1m at 26.5p over 2.5yrs ago, which had just gone into profit.
That selling majority in ONE go, for a company supposedly growing strongly is not usual.
There were numerous media tips, hype suggesting the company was going places, booming etc. I said it was being talked up so they could sell. Then suddenly CF dumps majority of his holding.
The events back up what I was saying.
That is not normal. Therefore, I believe the company was being talked up so they could sell.
If the company has so much potential then why dump majority of your holding in 1 go.
In terms of the CEO huge options. It is usual to have directors given options OVER A NUMBER OF YEARS, as you say year in and out.
Here the CEO, alone was been awarded 7m options to incentise him. The options were also back dated by a year and are exercisable in a year. Therefore, not over a number of years, as in the case you mentioned.
I don't think it's a coincidence that the media hype, intention to pay a nominal dividend etc all happening this year is a pure coincidence.
If you believe the hype then feel free to load up and sit back and wait for the gains.
I, personally, would not hold as I believe the business model is questionable, there are too many bear points and red flags, as I've previously indicated.
I would ask readers to look at my posting history of the other shares I've mentioned in my previous post.
I mentioned trmr, which is now called nexn. Have a look at that thread.
It went quiet 29th January and only this week posters have returned there.
HVO became busy from 29th January and has been so over the past month and has gone quieter since CF sold.
Nexn: https://www.lse.co.uk/SharePrice.html?shareprice=NEXN&share=Nexxen-Int-Ltd
HVO: https://www.lse.co.uk/ShareChat.html?ShareTicker=HVO&share=hVIVO&page=5
Coincidence???
Brumm
"Having new institutional investors on board is a positive as they can see the strong fundamentals of the business over the medium term"
Despite all the so call strong fundamentals over the medium term, CF sold the majority of his holding. If he had bought more with IIs buying significantly then that would be a positive, as he knows the business better than anyone else. But he didn't.
The huge options awarded to the CEO. Free money.
Whereas IIs use other people's money and invest in many companies. It's not going to hurt them if 1 company crashes.
Where are all these IIs scrambling for shares giving their support?
Look at TLY. Posters from here appear over there to deramp it. Yet using the same metric of IIs holding, c40% IIs hold TLY and some were increasing.
Turnkey,
Check my posting history. I've been saying for ages that these were being talked up. That's exactly what has happened.
CF sold majority of his holding as soon as it was showing a profit.
The other non-exec director sold 1/2 his holding.
Why would CF sell majority of his holding, if the future has such huge potential?
I've traded these previously. I didn't trade them during the current hype as I believed they were being talked up and were trading beyond my 'reasonable value', ie hyped, talked up and could crash at any time. Exactly what did happen.
CEO options are huge. It's 1 director with 7m options, exercisable in a year. The incentive exists for him to talk up the company so he can get his options.
Where's all the Institutions with huge holdings, > 3%++???
Re questionable business model.
I think CF knows more about the business than any II or poster. He has just sold the majority of his holding.
"Those companies are so keen for the hvivo offering that they helped fund the facility which will give hvo a big growth and margin runway."
Why didn't they build it for themselves then? I think because it's a questionable business model and they don't want their huge pharma name tainted. Do you think these huge billion $ pharmas spent a tiny few millions on building a facility out of the goodness of their heart? Really?
If there's demand then there's nothing stopping anyone else setting up a similar facility, joining forces with a competitor pharma.
It's not a coincidence that Polb is ramped just after this was at recent peak and today their sp is down whilst this is up.
Polb has zero revenue and all jam tomorrow.
If you believe there's a great future then great, back your conviction.
Look at my posting history:
Rthm - CEO had huge options, which I warned about the hype. The sp crashed as predicted - 80%
TAP - ex-CEO had a secondary placing to sell his shares. I saw as a red flag. The shares crashed as predicted.
Trmr - CEO gets millions of options. I warned of profit warnings, was told it's rubbish. They've issued several profit warnings. crashed 80%
Byot - Was ramped but I said competitors will enter the market. They did. The sp crashed as predicted, 95%
Nano - The legal case was questionable. I warned against the hype.
Shares crashed as predicted, 60%
In all cases, I presented my opinion based on the company newsflow and facts in the public domain.
https://www.lse.co.uk/profiles/stt1/
The newsflow has been as expected.
My comments have been consistent.
These were talked up as predicted.
I've added CF sells 1/2 his holding as a red flag to the long list of bear points/red flags I've previously posted.
CEO has huge options, exercisable in a year.
Questionable business model.
Revenue growth has slowed.
New facility largely funded by clients. So would have been in return for favourable treatment, so other clients will be lower in the pecking order.
No evidence of significant buying/holding by institutionS.
Trout
"IIs had a demand, CF and BB had some shares"
If IIs wanted to buy, then they could have done so in the market.
Where's all the IIs TR1s showing all this huge buys????
The newsflow here has been as I expected... The fallback in sp was as expected.
the shares were talked up... CF's buys were in profit, so he sold 1/2 his holding.
There's a lack of significant revenue growth. It's clearly slowed.
Questionable business model.
The CEO has huge 7m options, exercisable in a year.
Now CF sells 1/2 his holding.