Member Info for stt1

Hallsworthy,

Q3 ended yesterday.

Where are the £40m contracts they have been talking about?

TLY announced £6m contracts. Pretty good for a company with £17m mcap, so at least that'll keep you happy, given you claim to be a holder.

Some posters have mentioned cash. I see cash as a negative.

Why hold so much cash? £37m!!!

They don't pay a normal dividend - paid a nominal amount but why not pay a decent dividend?

Clients largely paid for the new facility. Why? If they have so much cash then why didn't they spend a little on setting up the new facility? Instead the clients who did pay for the new facility would want favourable treatment. That would be at the expense of other potential clients, which they could lose.

They said they are looking for an acquisition but not for vast majority of the cash.

£37m cash compared to a mcap of around £200m and compared to revenues of £62m - holding so much cash compared to business size is questionable.

Why do they need so much cash?

Dustofnations

"If institutions continue accumulating and the company continues performing well, the sellers willing to part with their shares at 30p should eventually dry up."

What will happen once Octopus buying eventually drys up?

Sellers won't dry up and there will be those who can see the chairman dumped his entire holding at 28p & 29p, so that sets a ceiling for now.

Sellers can also see that the CEO's >7m options are due to start exercise in just over 4 months time, what will happen when those options hit the market?

Sellers can also see that revenue growth rate has slowed significantly and the .

Where are the £40m of contracts the company mentioned months ago?

If anything, I think PIs are selling down, whilst telling others to stay invested.

Hotchip

"Shares are held for your own personal gain, not to satusfy others"

The company statement differs from your view.

That's the point. The company stated chairman sold his shares to satisfy II demand.

Yet there's still huge trades, so why did he need to sell?.

"Cathal Friel, Chairman, sold 21,159,177 ordinary shares in the Company earlier today at 29p each ("the Sale") to satisfy institutional demand post the Company's recent capital markets event. "

https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/hvivo/news/rns/story/xpdodqx/export

ThinIce,

"I am happy to concede (as others have) that CF's decision to offload his entire holding at the time was of concern (and yes, a red flag). However, having heard other views (here and elsewhere), I have now concluded that this was necessary so that he could free up funds to invest elsewhere."

I originally mentioned in Feb, the chairman dumping majority of his holding is a red flag, especially as the company was being talked up. It's good to see more readers agreeing with me.

I agree the chairman sold to free up funds to invest elsewhere. The problems are:

1) He is a sitting chairman not an ordinary investor, so his interest should be to investors not his own pocket.

2) The company stated that the chairman sold to satisfy II demand, as in the rns below.

Was it to satisfy II demand or to raise funds for himself?

Who's right?

https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/hvivo/news/rns/story/xlj8m3r/export

Thinice,

Good to see those points.

Hallsworthy,

Instead of posting your usual rubbish to divert away, why not join in and present your points on HVO, pros and cons?

What's your view on the chairman dumping his entire holding just 4 working days after the July TU, where the company was being talked up?

And the other points ThinIce has mentioned.. the other bear points I've raised:

The huge options awarded to the CEO, start excersable from just over 4 months time.

The lack of buying by the BoD.

That's a start, Hallsworthy, what is your view?

The problem is there's mixed messages coming from the company.

The company is being talked up and the CEO has >7m option, start to exercise in just over 4 months time. So it's in his interest to talk up the company.

However, the sitting chairman dumped his entire holding in 2 tranches, whilst the company was talked up. The entire remaining holding in July, just 2 months ago at 29p.

By doing so, the chairman's actions suggest the company's is fully valued at 29p.

The CFO also has millions of options. So it's in the CEO and CFO interest to talk up the company.

after halting guidance last year due to doctors strike and political upheavel, canaccord restarted it in july, after the ge.

cannocord target price 20p

on the mend

https://*********************/companies/uk/medical-equipment-services/totally-plc/research/canaccord-genuity/on-the-mend/85_c18686b7-4476-42d7-8803-2e94b0b30e17

Contrary to the deliberate lies being posted, TLY has dozens of clients.

NHS resource allocation is controlled by the NHS not the govn

"Structure. The English NHS is controlled by the UK government through the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), which takes political responsibility for the service. Resource allocation and oversight was delegated to NHS England, an arms-length body, by the Health and Social Care Act 2012."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Health_Service_(England)#:~:text=Structure,-Main%20article%3A%20Health&text=The%20English%20NHS%20is%20controlled,and%20Social%20Care%20Act%202012.

With NHS England:

What are integrated care systems?

Integrated care systems (ICSs) are partnerships that bring together NHS organisations, local authorities and others to take collective responsibility for planning services, improving health and reducing inequalities across geographical areas.

There are 42 ICSs across England, covering populations of around 500,000 to 3 million people.

https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/integrated-care-systems-explained

Hallsworthy,

"a very poor business model relying on a sole client"

That's a blatant lie as has been proven several times before.

TLY provide their services to all 4 UK Nations AND Republic of Ireland. Each UK Nation has it's own Health authority at national level.

Within each Nation, there's local health boards, eg England has ICBs. They tender out their requirements to private providers.

That's already dozens. As far as I'm aware Republic of Ireland is not controlled by any of the 4 UK Nations.

Thinice

"First rule of debate. You need to understand both sides of the argument, otherwise you are ill equipped to argue your point. He doesn’t have both sides, so he’s not worth listening to."

Great, you believe you are worth listening to because you highlight both pros and cons, do you??.

Why haven't you, moniman, Hallsworthy, 1gw_, StrictleyZinc, BillB highlighted the negative points? Why haven't you questioned them on why they haven't?

Can you please highlight the negative points of HVO?

Hotchip

"Absolutely not! Chairman is just a figurehead. CEO & CFO know most. Therefore, your opinion doesn't stack up. "

Obviously the CEO & CFO are all members of the BoD, as is the Chairman.

My question was "Do you believe the chairman knows more about the company than any II or PI?"

Are the CEO and CFO PIs or IIs? lol

Solvista

"Mo said he has no part in the running of the company anymore"

You mean the Chairman has no part in the running of the company anymore?

Then why's he still there, taking a salary, draining cash?

Unless of course, he is staying for a few months just so the CEO can get his 7m options. Be interesting if the chairman does resign around same time as CEO gets his options.

ThinIce

lol

Blackrhino

"CF has explained his decision. He’s now a wealthy man and can indulge his natural inclination to go for the multi-bagger opportunities. "

What about all the PIs who bought in mid 40s or were buying at 30p+ earlier this year?. They not wealthy are they?

A sitting chairman should never dump his ENTIRE holding, especially just 4 working days after a 'positive' TU and talked up by the CEO.

The sitting chairman is supposed to support the shareholders not their own pockets so they can look for other opportunities.

Look at TLY, the chairman has been buying, the CFO has been buying and c40% is owned by IIs.

Supporting the business and shareholders.

Solvista

"Mo said he has no part in the running of the company anymore"

Why would any CEO not want to be part of a company with "supposedly huge growth" potential???

Or

as I believe the company is being talked up. He obviously wants his options, has 7m and has only just over 4 months left to start exercising them!!

The lack of significant growth rate as per company figures.

Questionable business model

The company is obviously being talked up for M&A. It would give the CEO a reason to leave, wouldn't it?

What do you think will happen if CEO takes his options and leaves?

Solvista

"As for the Chairman selling out it was a stubid decision.I can understand the first trench to lock in some profits and start his new venture "

If the chairman had sold some in Feb, as the original placing suggested, I'd say it was ok as he was locking in some profits. However, selling out majority whilst the company was being talked up, I think is a red flag. I warned at the time that the company was being talked up so they could sell.

Selling out the remaining in July just 4 working days after the TU/Investor presentation when the company was again being talked up, I think is a huge red flag.

Then this article where the chairman seems to suggest "I'm alright Jack" doesn't support current PIs or IIs.

www.businesspost.ie/news/six-or-seven-million-quid-for-my-shares-thats-bloody-good-cathal-friel-on-selling-hvivo-stake/

I don't think it's a coincidence the CEO's options are due to start exercising in just over 4 months time. Obviously he would like his options and needs the sp to stay higher for the next 4 months.

Where's all these £40m contracts they talked about?

The original placing said around 25% would be sold, which would have been ok.

https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/hvivo/news/rns/story/xlj8m3r/export

But a day later the chairman dumped majority of his holding, which I see as a red flag.

https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/hvivo/news/rns/story/xe1g9jw/export

Hallsworthy

"It's clear to see why Octopus have recently bought 69 million and Rathbones 34 million, all at the current share price."

a massive c40% of IIs hold TLY, the TLY chairman has been buying, the TLY CFO has been buying.

Yet you're ignoring those metrics and are using different metrics to deramp those. Why's that?

https://www.lse.co.uk/profiles/hallsworthy/

Hallsworthy

"At the projected £100m revenue that would put us to 79p per share and tht doesn't factor in dividends along the way and increases in cash balance."

Well with your 79p target, you're loading up at 29p and not selling a single share until they reach 79p then?

"It's clear to see why Octopus have recently bought 69 million and Rathbones 34 million, all at the current share price."

Is it also clear why the sitting chairman dumped his entire holding at the current price?

I think the chairman knows more about the company than any II or PI?

Do you?

The CEO has 7m options which start to exercise in just over 4 months time. Therefore, it's not surprising the company is being talked up, as it was earlier in the year before the chairman sold.

Solvista,

"Generally CRO's are acquired 3.5-4 times revenue"

3x £62m is £186m against current mcap of £200m.

The chairman sold his entire holding in 2 tranches, 28p & 29p, Feb and July. He's already got his money.

I think he probably thought they were already trading at or near takeover prices.