Member Info for Techtonic

And ps..

This deffo has been the biggest mistake in my sharedealing exploits.

Anyway I urge anyone with any care to understand, to take a look at those test figures - and make your own mind up about whether this is going to be big in the USA.

I just can't see healthcare providers getting excited by those figures.

Empirically, they are not good.

If anyone wants to challenge that and give a good case for those figures please do I would love to hear.

Bloggsy,

I thank my personal deity on a daily basis that the 95% of numpty investors who lose money (like your good self) exist, allowing the 5% with a modicum of intelligence to make some.

The reason this is, apart from an innate lack of intelligence, is the most people don't understand their investment and rely on these message boards...

And even then most people become emotionally bonded to a share and can't admit theyre wrong.

I am a bit heavy-hearted in your response and that you never talk about the share.

I did put some effort into that post but ultimately, the company will be hoisted by their own petard.

Whether I'm invested or not (I'm out! With a fair loss overall).. should not have any bearing on your investment.

You should be looking at Ciz own projections I'm not concentrating on what colour trousers I'm wearing or what's my favourite colour.

The only thing that should matter to you is your investment.

I must say congratulations to Greend100 for some execllent posts, at least trying to understand the science and financial implications for himself and Cizzle. (I’m sure he won’t desire this accolade from persona non grata!)

However science is science.

For those who don’t like facts - please don’t read.

The Sensitivity/ Specificity/PPV/ NPV and Accuracy results presented by CizzleBio itself are POOR.

For those not versed in science, the results show NPVs (Negative Predictive Value*) of 94, 96 and 85 respectively - which is very good.

But a PPV (Positive Predictive Value*) of 34, 42 and 55 respectively - which is VERY Poor.

The overall ACCURACY of the the test was 42, 42 and 51 respectively - Accuracy measures how well a diagnostic test correctly identifies the presence or absence of a disease overall.

It’s proportion of all test results (positive and negative) that are CORRECT.

51% is the best result?!!!

The PPV and NPV values are based on ‘prevalence’ in a population. So this depends on the age and demographics of those tested.

Eg If it was a test for a Dementia protein - the accuracy of the test would be skewed towards those more elderly. Ie the true positives would be greater with an older cohort and lower with a younger cohort of testees. (Thus skewing the data)

So Cizzle’s Lung cancer Negative test accuracy (The NPV) is excellent, but the PPV and over Accuracy is terrible!

And PPV is probably the metric that healthcare professionals will use when deciding whether to use the test en masse!

Look at other tests by other companies for other conditions - eg Oxford Biodyn PSE test, accuracy, PPV and NPV of 94, 93 and 95% respectively. Look at other tests out there and compare.

I ask long-term investors again:

If you were starting from scratch today, using Ciz own data/ projections (Not me, not my spin, but their OWN data), would you honestly now invest in this?

Brondby,

I disagree with your "main risk" assertion.

The main risk, imo, is that all this takes so long to become revenue generative, that it's superceded.

Joey, you joker!

I said I had a £1,000 left, and had a sell order in from last night.

Jesus, people on here are nuts!

It went through! Get a life people.

You all should be looking at your own investments, not witch-hunting.

You're a total mentalist joey😁🤣

And people on here reading the Bible of Neil and not Ciz' own data ought to try Church.

Paname..

With all due respect, how can you label anything "circumspect" without knowing anything about posters.

Neil , as from experiential judgment, got this wrong time and time again.

The only thing you need to know is what the company say

As I said before many many times, Ciz seem to have a product that will sell somewhat. The sensitivity is excellent. The specificity isn't.

Ciz has told you itself that revenues will be average.

PIs on here are simply projecting their own hopes on revenue - against company data! Couldn't make it up only in the world of fantasy share dealing.

And for the record I am out today. I may have a dabble for a trade.

So what ? What I say is irrelevant . What Neil says is irrelevant.

Hierarchy , sheep, herd mentality and idiocy!

The company itself says it ain't going to be big! Madness of the crowds.

Neil, I thought you weren't going to respond yesterday?

"Slanging match?"...

Well if you look at the posts, you will have to decide who's been involved in the slanging match! Takes two or ten to tango

You may not like the words, but the theme is that Cizzle isn't going to achieve what people expected.

Mr Market is going to look at the projections, inevitable delays, most likely problems with licensing, future fundraising for further ventures , and many on here are going to get an uncomfortable lesson in investing.

Ps my bountiful remaining £1,000 was sold first thing today! I shall spend my lucre on a pack of crisps and bottle of pop.

As stated previously, will assess RNS by RNS..

This will spike, but ultimately going nowhere folks (by their own figures - and , remember, they are "sales pitch" figures (optimistic by definition).

Ah Ricky... Still talking about me and not your own investment.

Are you happy with it?

Buyers regret, me? Indeed.

I told you about this month ago and said that I'd sold most of my position at a 10% loss, which is the prudent thing to do if faith has been lost.

I had nearly 3 million shares at one point.

I've only got just over £1,000 left in..

So I don't really stress about that. The loss was taken and made about half back elsewhere.

So stick to your own investment and tell me why you are still here?

Why didn't those who saw this Prospectus post it's details months ago?

It's patently obvious that if someone had seen this prospectus and thought it was positive, they would be singing it from the rafters and would have supplied a link.

But everyone with eyes and a semi-functioning brain can see these projections aren't great.

My view of Neil as changed dramatically over time. As I mentioned I got sucked into it because of posts (before I started really researching)..

But I now see Neil as a ramper who has got too much involved.

Why did Neil suddenly have a melodramatic outburst with all these ridiculous legal caveats, for a perspectus that is basically in the public domain.

Why did he present it as a "shhhhh... What I've seen is amazing!!" Without including any details that he knew about?

I'm taking it Neil must have seen that perspectus in April, but decided not to share - WHY?

Because Neil and most on here (including Cizz own RNS') will only present the positive case for investment.

It took a while but it's obvious that nailed us not present a balanced point of view at all... In fact I thought it was downright disingenuous yesterday.

Daddy.. I don't know if 200k tests is possible or not. But it's still chicken feed.

This is definitely not the business most people thought it was going to be.

If those people on this board can look in the mirror take themselves back one year and say you feel the same about Ciz ....and be honest with yourselves.

The real problem here - which differentiates is in a negative way from the French and Greeks et al, is that instead of trying to engage in critical thinking, the Brits (generally), will just attack the other position without particularly thinking about the argument.

Everyone on this board - are you assessing your investment on a weekly basis and changing your views as the facts and data change?

Trying to be objective and dialectical in your thinking?

I'm not the problem here. Ciz is the problem. YOUR investment. It's no point getting angry with me for Ciz' own data .

Like with Jace etc...these ££££ projections have been blown out of the water by the company's own prophecies, this reasonably would lead to a change of mindset.

Does it...? Or does it just lead to mor entrenched attacking of a messenger.

Like someone was talking about in the Times yesterday, the French prefer cycling and reading about philosophy.

The Brits want to go to shopping malls.

Ricky, I've still got a few shares in here, which I will be selling on a spike.

And I think you'll find if you leave it and come back in three years time, this won't be a viable usiness will have been superseded by others

I'm at a loss to understand some of the comments on here after seeing CizBio's very own average predictions over a three-year period.

My prediction without knowing the data was that Ciz would probably reap in 2 million dollars in a couple of years.

It's not far off their own - top end - predictions.

Net gain/ revenue approx $29mill - Approx £25mill.

So ciz get 10% and 10% of bio. Just

5Million in THREE YEARS!

And that's without any other products come into market and some kind of static fantasy land.

The problem with many people and investing is that once they've got into a share big time they become emotionally trapped.

If these figures had been shown to you before you invested, including the specificity, most on here would have been very unimpressed.

This is a long-term project with no projections of great income and many variables in the process.

Daddylonglegs...

There's a reason 95% of investors on these forums make a loss.

They can't read the writing on the wall - even when it's from the company's own pen

Brond...

2 things..

1) these year 3 estimates by Cizzle will buy definition be overly optimistic.

Do you really think nothing will have changed in three years?? This is not a static market.

Those figures used by Cizzle will be top end estimates.. I bet they don't achieve 100,000 sales.

2) depends on the market what the multiples of revenue are.

Up to now the market has not been very confident about this.

So to assume 5 times revenue is wrong in my opinion.

And I simply don't think they'll get anywhere near their own figures.

But 10% of not much is...not much!

That OTT melodramatic outburst by Neil earlier was a sign of panic imo.

Very unlike a neil post - and very misleading by not including any data to the negative

95% is great

61% is bad.

It will mean there are so many false positives that it will ingress on its economic viability, in that there will have to be follow up CT scans just to prove those negative tests.

Are health care centres going to like those figures?

I've been very negative on this for some time now. It's been smelling bad for ages..

It will trundle along with a few spikes here and there until I think it will eventually burn itself out with it funding problems and increased fundraising from shareholders

Lovelyboy, and especially Green..

Many thanks

Let's go back to what each of us have been saying.

I've been saying that take up will be nowhere near people's dreams on here.

That funding will be a struggle and we will have to pay back the loan.

Time will ingress on all this and make deeper marks into the business model.

Those figures and those projections by Ciz itself make sobering reading.

And to be honest Neil, I think your melodramatic incursion today smells of squeaky bum overexposure.

For those posters like Jace this should be a piece of stark reality.

I estimated in the first few years 100,000 tests a year..

If you work this out at the approximate I gave - around $200/test..

Ciz will never make any money out of this.

It's all there in black and white - from the horse's mouth.

Ps counting cards..lighten up!

Neil...ah..

Rightyo..

I have never seen you explicitly say you haven't taken part in placings.

Thanks for the confirmation

:o) haha!

Now I didn't say I didn't seen it did I?

My question was did it make you want to invest more?