Member Info for triumph1

Yawn. No one gives a hit about buzz phrases like "potential to grow", especially when it comes from a company which such an epically dismal track record such as mediazest. This is the sort of company that would categorise someone as a "new client" because they took a free pen!

Show us the money, not talk. Why not provide us with revenue guidance for the next 6 months for these amazing opportunities? I know.....because they know their chatter is bs and would get into trouble if they attempted to quantify this. No revenue guidance implies lack of faith in their "significant opportunities".

Sorry happy days, but this companies failings are unforgivable. They have had years and years. Revenue dropped time and time again. Using covid as an excuse is easy; this company was in terminal decline long before then.

The only reason anyone should touch this is hoping that an RTO happens. If the SP dropped to 0.04 (value of listing) then I'll give it a punt purely in the hope that a company comes along and makes something of the listing.

Dude, who are you kidding? All I see is buzz words. Ifs, could be's, maybe's. Yeah we get it you are heavily invested. But if you think that that RNS was in any way shape or form good, you honestly need your head testing. If you believe in buzz words such as "significant opportunity" then honestly more fool you, and by the looks of today's volume.....I would say no one is fooling for it. I assume that is your £190 top up seeing how confident you are that this will boom after that RNS. Why not top up more today? Lets just say it wont be exactly difficult to spot your trade. It's a no brainer.....right?

Wrong. It's obvious you are desperate for this to come good. Pointless trashing every post that sees things how they are. I strongly suspect you must be linked to the company somehow to defend every post so ferociously. So how about you spend your time creating SH value instead of defending deserved criticism for a company solely set up to fund a lifestyle of those who run it. Companies like this should not exist on public markets! They are a danger to those who get suckered in and believe such nonsense these directors write in attempt to pump the stock.

Well, with not a single trade posted yet, he has quite a lot of bits to chomp from at 0.09p.

Admin costs did not exactly drop in line with revenue, makes up over half of revenue generated and these "significant opportunities" were not exactly quantified. Not a single figure regarding future earnings from these significant opportunities anywhere. Not even a prediction.

Define significant opportunity. It can range from cold calling up to being on the cusp of a large contract. I strongly suspect the former. I mean, if I rang microsoft saying I have some amazing software to flog then i could also call that a significant opportunity for me.

If this isn't a lifestyle company, I dont know what is.

No no no porkster. Don't compare NCYT to EKF. Give the people on this board a little context re revenues and profits in the years running up to covid. EKF 2019 revs c.£45m vs NCYT revs c.£11m and running at a loss.

You are forgetting the time value of consistently growing revenues and EPS like EKF have been doing. Plus the board are much more experienced over there where running a profitable company is concerned. EKF have other revenue streams to fall back on. I could go on.... This is called qualitative value porks, and arguably makes up the largest portion of a companies value. Yes, placing value on intangible things is subjective, but you cant argue against company valuations being higher than NCYT when they have consistently delivered profits over a much longer time span than one year without the occurrence of a black swan event.

We are about to find out. Everyone and their dog will be buying at 300 for a quick trade back to mid 300s.

Well, Mr Market clearly not buying into the whole maximum liability of £20m, especially when in the next sentence he goes onto say that settlement is not guaranteed. After digesting, not really much substance in that RNS. We have narrowed down the nature of the dispute from literally anything to.....literally anything. Was it the colour DSHC didn't like? Did it not work as promised? Does it link with reports made late last year re difficulty using q16 without the additional bolt on products for ease of use? Timescales? These things usually go back and forth in a sort of mediation equivalent for a couple to a few months before going legal. If parties cant resolve and it sees a courtroom, this could drag for years.

Does offering up £20m mean that this was novacyt's diddle, and in fact DSHC have a case? They do kind of imply that there is some credibility to DSHC's case by offering this, unless they want this swept under the rug asap therefore offering a relatively small olive branch which if i was GM, i would offer as this sort of thing dragging on is damaging to reputation. Its a fine line between implying guilt, and wanting a timely resolution however. Quite possible, but again, we just dont know.

Well murzy, nice to see some info to digest for a change.

Much said was already known. However we finally have some clarification on the dispute...but unfortunately still in the dark as to when this can be resolved.

We now know a little bit more re the nature of the dispute and it sounds like DSHC had an issue with the product or it did not function as intended to fall under scope of a limited assurance warranty.

So we may or may not get away with a 20m impairment....still no clearer on the financial outfall of ths, but I agree it sounds like it is less than the worst case priced in here.

Also another note re one trick pony....virtually every single bullet point contained the word covid-19 so by sounds of it, the company still are not doing enough to pivot away from this. Certainly no solid roadmap in place regarding diversification.

Overall it was a bit more upbeat on previous RNSs, but certainly no reason to get too excited just yet.

it objectively really does. Scarcity is merely a constant. As i said, anyone can code a cryptocurrency and make it more scarce than bitcoin, but it will be worth jack as no one will mine it. It makes no logical sense to say that because there is x in circulation (scarcity), this is worth y at time t. Scarcity is not a time variable due to the inherent way bitcoin works, so it simply makes no sense to value bitcoin because of its scarcity. When bitcoin was worth 1c, max circulation is around 21m. Now its worth $30k, max circulation is still 21m. So how can you say that because there will only ever be 21m bitcoins in circulation, this is what gives it today's value? bitcoin value varies with time, therefore whatever gives bitcoin value must be time variant. On average and over the long run, when something gains in value after time t, another variable with respect to time has varied. So what has varied with bitcoin in the long run? Popularity. Popularity is directly proportional to hashrate which is directly linked to difficulty. Hashrate is the closest measure we have of quantifying popularity, and popularity vs instantaneous or short term demand/supply are different beasts. You wouldn't value a company at the peak SP of a short squeeze, would you? Supply/demand mechanics should never be used to value something as it is reactionary to greater powers at work. Work required to mine a block has increased, hashrate (popularity/demand with respect to time) has increased therefore price has increased. These variables are all time variant, which is why value can fluctuate. Without working out how to value bitcoin, I have no idea how you can then start talking about a store of that value. A store of value attributed by trader supply/demand mechanics at any given time? Not a great store of value IMO.

Hashrate is also key for security and integrity of the entire network. A low hash rate leaves huge vulnerabilities in the entire network via 51% attacks. Although this is self destructive hence pointless, it is still a huge concern for one company or nation to have such a large chunk of network hashrate as then it will effectively no longer be decentralized. Look at the influence China has on the price.

"Hashrate doesn’t drive either supply or demand. The network could be 1EH or 100EH and there would still be 144 blocks/900 coins (on average) mined every day, so a fixed supply." I am trying to appoint a fundamental base value for bitcoin based on time variants and tangible value of creation effort and real world use(which bitcoin has very little/none compared to other cryptos like ETH), not on trader supply/demand dynamics which is only relevant in the very short term, so I'm not sure what your point is. I can assure you that the difference in fundamental bitcoin value for a 1EH network vs 1ZH network would be significant and for several reasons, the key reasons being popularity and network integrity.

I cant agree fully with the scarcity arguement rorydinho. There are plenty of scarce things in this world that are worthless. Platinum is 30x more scarce than gold...now ask yourself why it is valued less than gold. There are many reasons, but the common denominator amongst the various reasons is probably popularity.

Anything can be made to be scarce in the digital world. I could code a crypto which is much more scarce than bitcoin and much more difficult to mine. Will that therefore have more value than bitcoin?

I personally think its popularity and uptake is what gives it value, and the difficulty of obtaining it is what acts as its store of value, not how scarce It is, purely down to the way bitcoin works. The closest metric to determine popularity is hashrate. I agree it is not as black and white as that, but if hashrate drops, difficulty drops which is more than just a speed limit. Work done, or cost to mine a block cost is reduced. Less work to acquire a block equals less value (this excludes halving effect which of course has the effect of less reward for the same work done, therefore 2×work needs to be put in for the same reward, or 2^n work where n is the number of halving events which has an effect of increasing value as more work needs to be imputed for the same reward). I never implied supply is greater if hashrate reduces because of course it is not; I merely pointed out the easier something is to obtain, the less value it inherently has (or should have)

This is all purely philosophical of course and everyone probably has differing opinions on how bitcoin derives its value. I personally believe hashrate is the most important variable in the long run if you ignore sentiment driven events.

To clear things up butchers, my definition of a one trick pony:

Revenues derived from one, or "from a group of products that solves only one specific problem". Your definition may be different and you may see versalab as a new revenue stream despite it being marketed and pretty much solely used for covid testing only, but I believe my definition is aligned with the markets definition and the reason why it is valued as such.

Mr Market no longer cares for covid related products unless they are groundbreaking and lead to significant contract wins, which even then will still only lead to a step change in SP approximately equal to the cash vale of the contract give or take the weeks of SP overshoot (good enough for 95% on this BB, but not good enough for large institutions). Diversification in revenue stream is key to sustainability which will lead to organic SP growth, but is currently non existent, unless as you say i have missed something due to lack of research.

Those two words again; diversification and sustainability. We haven't seen either as of yet or any credible roadmap to take us there. Just more "next generation" covid related products. So will NCYT become a specialist in covid related testing? Nothing wrong with this, but i do get the distinct impression that the company is unsure of what path to take next. NCYT are at a juncture where they must decide on a path to take and have a solid roadmap in place that investors can rally behind. Otherwise, if covid disappears, NCYT goes back to being a nobody.

Those saying hashrate, thus difficulty decreasing is actually good for ARGO dont know what they are talking about and dont understand crypto mechanics.

As mentioned earlier, the only thing that gives bitcoin value is hash rate as the more people who utilise the network, the more valuable it is and the more difficult mining becomes, thus AISC increases. Yes it will be easier to mine....but who is interested in something that is "easy" to obtain??? The fractional increase in bitcoin mined by ARGO caused by the reduced difficulty will pale in comparison to the bitcoin slump! If hashrate drops, so does bitcoin value. ARGO will end up mining something that is worthless.

Again, china is extremely important to the bitcoin network. The slack in hashrate will be very hard for another player to pick up due to the cost of electricity in the west. All this equates to a very bearish picture for bitcoin.

Also, unless NCYT have ambitions to become an MMF, a "high growth" company with ambitions to be at the sharp end of the diagnostics market with half its value in cash is a bit odd. Have they ran out of ideas to take things further? Not sure what to do with a big pile of cash? Plans about how this cash will be used would be nice and now is exactly the time to make a move.

The NCYT wish list is growing. Lets hope GM doesn't leave us with more questions.

Hard to argue with that. Spot on axe. Odd why some seem surprised regarding the SP reaction here.

Indeed. Anything to counter the "one trick pony" argument would be most welcome by SH too. Because at the moment, that argument wins hand down until numbers prove otherwise. Mcap vs sales (all from a group of products that solves one specific problem) certainly imply that the market views this as a one hit wonder and is a big reason why this is trading only twice cash at bank.

Talk about diagnostics not involving COVID would add to the longer term picture. Diversification and sustainability are the key words that will take NCYT to the next level and put in place a p/e that makes more sense to the unaided eye.

from the perspective of a contrarian, I would say the complete opposite risehall. A drop in SP the day before results is usually a good thing in my books as expectations are subdued and any surprise will see the losses recovered instantly. I would be far more concerned if there was a 10% rise today. Perhaps PIs are learning?

Agree with most regarding news that could take this lower. It would take something quite special from management to take this a leg lower. What could possibly be worse than what is already out there, other than a confirmation that DSHC have a case and NCYT diddled the contracts.

I'm not expecting fireworks tomorrow, but further clarification would be most welcome for all. If i were a gambler, my money would be on a green day tomorrow. To what extent i wouldn't like to bet.

And no, i have not brought any shares today.

pipeline this, potential that, maybe this, could be that....

Show the investors some blasted conversions! Since that RNS that sent the SP tumbling 50%+, the lack of conversion is worrying. Nobody cares about pipeline jams anymore, they want darn conversions!

The penny will never drop here, literally and figuratively. Why companies like this are allowed to exist on public stock markets is beyond me. A public listing for a company like this is simply not appropriate. I guess its a legacy thing.

The company puts a TV on a shop wall and thinks its the next Global. They even included the brand of the TV haha. I mean, come on.....

The only multi bags to be seen here are those slumped over the directors shoulders with your cash inside them!

Well, it better be one hell of a plan to warrant the massive cut in dividend. It's the safety of 5% divi like clockwork or the risk of growth under iffy leadership. I think it will take an awful lot of convincing, but let's face it; something had to give. GSK have done jack in the last 25 years which is pretty appaling by anyone's standard. Look at the ftse100 over the same period.

Pascal did it over at AZN which languished for years before so certainly possible to repair reignite the very rusty GSK growth engine.

Its a phase every single security in the sense of a financial instrument has gone through as it is deemed that "retail investors" lack the general knowledge regarding risk....which is generally correct.

From gold to p2p sector, once the regulatory hammer comes down, companies must buckle up or die. Overall over the longer term, regulation is extremely good for the underlying security. It gets rid of the utter crap that plagues cryptos and as things stand 95% of cryptos are utter crap. As for NFTs.....let's not even go into the insanity of that.

As for bitcoin, the hype and craziness of the past year is over and now it is coming down hard along with others like eth.

So now how to value it. A difficult one....however seeing as it is likened to gold, the only sensible metric to use to find an approximate base is the AISC of mining a coin. However it is not as simple as that due to difficulty decreasing as network hash rate decreasing so that the time taken to mine a block remains consistently around 10 mins. An analogy to this is like gold that floats to the surface, making it easier to mine if less people mine it. Gold does not do this. Using this method of valuation must take into consideration network hashtags, thus difficulty, thus AISC.

You can now see bitcoins conundrum with china, and how important china is to bitcoin.

Exactly. What exactly is everyone so excited about on this board tomorrow. If you think GM will announce a conclusion to DSHC dispute, think again. If you think a miraculous new contract will land with results tomorrow, think again. If that's why you brought in, hoping to make a quick profit.....think again. Of course if these things do happen (99% wont), then the SP will adjust accordingly.

There is more likely bad news than good tomorrow IMO. It depends how much they have left out of the balance sheets regarding this ongoing dispute and any hints they may give away.

Today's SP reaction doesnt share the same enthusiasm of this board. So it does appear the market has its expectations well managed this time around.