Member Info for stt1

Halls,

You can't provide the simple evidence to back up your claims. Because there isn't any.

This is example of evidence of IIs holding a significant chunk and II buying from a share which you claimed you held but sold even though a massive circa 47% is held by IIs.

TLY:

You previously claimed to have held TLY, even though you never had a clue as to what they did.

https://www.lse.co.uk/ShareChat.html?ShareTicker=TLY&share=Totally&thread=64E3FE1F-285B-4B1E-80C0-44945E727F99

around 47% of TLY is held by IIs. That's a huge amount.

https://www.totallyplc.com/investors/shareholder-information/shareholdings/

With Liontrust increasing earlier this month.

https://ir.design-portfolio.co.uk/viewer/100/60322

That is evidence. Mcap £12m, revenue £132m(fy2023) and paid a dividend recently. Now where's the evidence for HVO

Where's the evidence of IIs significant holding in HVO? Where's the evidence of TRs, IIs crossing the threshold.

You obviously struggle to understand the words significant, buying, IIs(plural)

TwoGood2Die,

Spire Healthcare are a private healthcare provider, just like TLY!!! lol

You'll see some directors who are/were on both BoDs!!

The main difference is TLY have guaranteed customers.

On that subject, you're clueless about TLY's customers. NHS England, NHS Scotland, NHS Wales, NHS Northern Ireland are separate entities. They are not the one customer.

Then you have HMP and all the corporate customers of their Corporate Wellbeing division.

Plus, Republic of Ireland do not come under UK Jurisdiction.

Are you making things up because Nano's legal case went as I predicted and the shares crashed from 70p to 17p? I'm sure the legal case outcome was poor because the parties read my comments.. You're bitter and desperate.

honest gov. ;-)

Twogoodtolie,

"one customer the government"

More lies. That's complete bs from you as usual.

The devolved governments of Wales, Scotland and NI operate their own NHS system, as was evidenced during the pandemic.

Republic of Ireland is a sovereign state and gained independence from the UK a century ago.

TLY provides it's services in all 4 UK nations plus Republic of Ireland.

"Totally entered the insourcing market through the launch of Totally Healthcare in 2019. Totally Healthcare provide bespoke insourcing solutions across multiple specialties to trusts and hospitals in the UK and Ireland, helping to reduce waiting lists by utilising hospital facilities outside of normal working hours and at weekends. Totally Healthcare provides support across specialties such as endoscopy, ophthalmology, ear nose and throat ("ENT"), orthopaedics, urology and plastics with activities including diagnostics, day-case surgery and outpatient activity."

https://www.totallyplc.com/about-us/our-businesses/

Hallysworthy,

That's not evidence of significant buying by IIs. Where are all the TR1s?

"Tell me, if 10 institutions hold 2.5% each is that more significant than 1 institution buying 5%?"

Given HVO is supposed to have been a fast growing company, you'd expect IIs to be scrambling to buy and several would be already be holding > 3%. But that's not the case.

"You seem to change your constantly change your language to suit,"

My assertion has been consistent. It's in the title of this thread.

Anyone can read my posts.

I posted company/sector newsflow and facts with my opinions based on them. I've done the same other shares, trmr, nano, housebuilders etc.

These have crashed.

Scinv,

"Institutions hold about 10% of the company (62M shares)"

"By the way you can find the evidence on morningstar."

That is not evidence of significant buying by IIs, is it?. If there was significant buying then there would legally be TR1s and the holding registered with the company. Where are the links to the TR1s?

It's not uncommon for IIs to hold a tiny % in several different companies.

"Significant buying" as opposed to "tiny amounts held by several IIs" are 2 different things.

Hallsworthy also claimed there were frequent holding updates? Where's the evidence?

Hallsworthy,

I'm sure all readers would like to see the evidence which you claim exists.

I'm asking you to back up your assertion with evidence that there is significant evidence of IIs buying as well as there were holding updates frequently released.

You have failed to provide any evidence for either.

Why do you need to post an image?

You claimed:

" there is lots of evidence, there is an updated Holdings released frequently and they show institutions increasing their holdings."

If there were significant buying by IIs then they would be on the register.

If updated holdings were reported frequently then there would be holding rns', unless they were below 3% and so not significant.

Please provide the evidence that there have been significant buying by IIs.

Going by your assertion of lots of evidence, I would expect to see lots of huge buying by IIs with lots of TR-1s.

You can easily provide a link to those.

In reply to this morning's post by Hallworthy:

Hallworthy,

You're entitled to your opinion. I'm going by facts in the public domain and forming my opinion based on those facts.

Look at your reply to 'significant buying by IIs"

" there is lots of evidence, there is an updated Holdings released frequently and they show institutions increasing their holdings."

Please post the evidence of significant buying by IIs and these frequent holding rns' you refer to?.

I assume you know the what the word significant means?

Not forgetting that shares on Loan are around 10-11m, 1.7% and posters don't consider that as significant.

Btw, who's lending out those 10-11m shares?

Moniman,

I've done my research.

There a red flags. All of these are in the public domain, readers can see them for themselves.

Questionable business model.

Huge options for 1 director

Huge options for 1 director were back dated by a year so they he can excercise them sooner. Very odd.

Huge shares on loan.

Nominal dividend despite claiming to have £30m in bank.

No evidence of significant buying by IIs.

Why hasn't Mo loaded up using his own money given the future is supposedly fantastic?

"There are no red flags"

Why won't you prove me wrong, load up and hold for at least 2 years?

Is it because you are aware of the red flags?

Last year, TLY announced their interims date on 31st October with the results on 14th November.

I'm expecting similar this time.

Facts rather than speculation.

Moniman,

"The Red Flags you go on about don't exist"

That's your opinion.

Obviously you will prove me wrong that red flags don't exist by loading up at 20p and holding for 2 years or £70m revenues, won't you?.

The red flags are there for everyone to read and judge for themselves.

Hallsworthy,

"Revenue slowed because we were at capacity, hence the expansion"

Really??

The reported £50m revenue for fy2022 and is only around 10% higher for this full year.

Given the lead time to set up projects, they would, therefore, had known about the lack of revenue growth beyond £50m 2 years years ago.

The new facilities won't be up and running until next year, so going by your post, that's 3 years they would have been at known capacity. What happened to planning?

Why didn't they plan and setup the new facilities 2 years ago when they would have known that they needed it?

From the recent H1 report:

"hVIVO increases its revenue guidance to£55 million (excluding other income) for 2023"

"hence the mention of 90m revenue going forward from interviews by Mo."

From their H1 results, they say they have a contracted order book of £78m.

That is obviously multi-year and so where's the significant revenue growth going forward?

https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/hvivo/news/rns/story/rgz9g3w/export

Which year are they expecting £90m revenues?

Littlevillage

"It seems at that price sellers seem to appear and the SP cannot get above that price."

That's what happens when there's around 10-11m shares on loan.

The company broker has a target price in mid 20s. They also suggest this tp is based on comparison to nearest UK peer, Ergomed, which was TAKEN OVER.

Moniman

" I'll give Mo and Hvivo another 18 months then it's time to rethink this company as a worthwhile investment case."

The same thing has been said over the past 2 years. Wait another year, then another.

Moniman

"here we are back in the teens with over £30 million in cash, £50 million turnover and making a profit and the biggest order book in its history circa £80 million"

The revenues growth has slowed. Look at revenues for fy2022 and fy2023, hardly any growth. Revs for fy2022 were £50m and they expecting £55m for fy2023. Even allowing for excluding other income the growth has slowed considerably.

Their contracted order book only increased by around 10% when compared to the previous year.

"As at 30 June 2023, the Group's weighted contracted orderbook increased to£78 million (H1 2022: £70 million)"

" The Board has increased its revenue guidance to £55 million for 2023 "

https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/hvivo/news/rns/story/rgz9g3w/export

There's no evidence of significant buying, otherwise there would have been TR-1s.

It's not uncommon for funds/IIs to take a punt on companies.

Watch the red flags here.

Stifel... Another red flag to add to my list.

Brokers are paid for their services.

Note they have a 27p target price, which is similar to the company broker.

Brokers get paid for their coverage. There aren't many who do independent coverage.

Read my posts on Trmr just a year after Stifel was appointed. When I posted the below posts, the sp was around 800p. Stifel and other US brokers had a target which was significantly higher than the 800p, whilst I was posting about the red flags.

The sp crashed and is now around 150p in just 2 years.

https://www.lse.co.uk/profiles/stt1/?page=18

It's funny coincidence, as trmr also had questionable business model, the CEO also had huge options and they also had huge shares on loan.

I believe the Help to Buy Scheme is toxic and will come back to haunt the govn/HBs.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/property/why-help-to-buyers-homeowners-fall-off-property-ladder/

Greened,

"1) Questionable business model.

Seriously? In what way - looking forward to the reply on that one…

Read the HVO(was Orph) company newsflow.

2) Huge options given to CEO. -

why is that an issue

Because anyone with such huge options (and he was the only director to be awarded them) will talk up the company and just before those options can be exercised. As evidenced now, nominal dividend, new facilities etc just months before MO's huge options can be exercised.

3) Lack of dividend despite the huge cash in bank

If you want a large dividend buy Vodafone

You missing/twisting the point.

They paying a nominal dividend. Why only nominal when the cash position suggest they can afford to pay a proper divided?.

4) History of missing expectations, missed spin offs, eg DiM.

You’re referencing pre MK days…

I believe CF is still pulling the strings.

"The other points re Ergomed selling at 28% above SP are immaterial"

Again, I'm quoting the company's own broker/NOMAD. They have more information than any BB poster.

They are the one's who made the comparison and target price on HVO of mid 20s.

These are my concerns - bear points.

Feel free to discuss.

Questionable business model.

Huge options given to CEO.

Significant Shares on Loan.

Lack of dividend despite the huge cash in bank

History of missing expectations, missed spin offs, eg DiM.