Member Info for TWatcher

"It would be pointless having a legal contract or one party can change their minds without any recourse for the other party"

You might want to mention that to the CEO.

TonyRowe
Why did you think that, CK explicitedly stated in the Q&A at a previous presentation that there was no minimum.

They got they preproduction payments for circa £2.9M. They got loan equipment. That's their lot.

Jimihendrix:
"It hasn't expired"

Can you have a word with Omega please
RNS this morning
"We now have confirmation that the contract expired at the end of Phase 1".
T H E C O N T R A C T H A S E X P I R E D

But hey, you go with shredz

it could be extended, but ODX have now confirmed it has expired....can't you read ?

LOL good ole shredz, quick to block anyone that doesn't give him due deference

errr...which means at this point I've done nothing in terms of trades.

Capt...no idea, was in a bit of shock this AM, but coming to terms with it now.

Reading the contract again it says "The contract shall start on the effective date and shall continue for the duration of phase 1 which ends on the long stop date (1st April) as extended by agreement between the authority and the supplier unless notice is given by the authority to move to phase 2"

So appears that there must have been one or more extensions to the phase 1 long stop date. The question then is, when was the last extension, and when did it expire ? Does the date selected for the interims closely coincide with the last known extension date ?

giantnemycrab
"Colin said at the last presentation the contract was still in discussions. it is not expired. As others have said they would need to RNS if unfulfilled"

The problem with that logic is that unless it expired yesterday, where was the RNS telling us it expired ?

I've quoted exactly from the contract. Whether there were internal extensions or whatever, who knows, we definitely weren't informed.

The incomptence get worse

From the RNS
"We now have confirmation that the contract expired at the end of Phase 1". So absolutely clear, the contract expired at the end of phase 1.

the actual contract is here:-
https://atamis-1928.cloudforce.com/sfc/p/#0O000000rwim/a/4J000000kI0H/EySZ28HhbGWp.KyQFExkrBzY54f6HXd6hOd1W5fDn3E

section 13
The Contract takes effect on the Effective Date and ends on the End Date. Unless the Authority
gives notice to the Supplier that it is proceeding to Phase 2, the Contract shall expire on the Long
Stop Date. If the Supplier completes the requirements set out in this Agreement to be completed
during Phase 1 to the Authority’s satisfaction, the Authority may exercise an option to continue
the Contract by giving written notice to the Supplier during Phase 1 whereupon the Contract shall
continue until the end of the Initial Contract Period."
The long stop date is defined as 1st of April 2021 (see the 2nd page)

So according to the contract phase 1 expired 1st of April.

Did ODX get confirmation that DHSC was going to phase 2 as per the contract ? If not then what information did they receive and from whom, that suggested that this contract was not expired on the 1st of April ? (that's nearly 7 months ago BTW).

Also, when the contract expires, the loan equipment is returned according to the contract, although DHSC might throw ODX a scrap and decide not to look about it.

section 13.5
"If the Contract ends or expires other than in accordance with clause 13.3.2:
13.5.3 the Supplier must promptly return any of the Authority’s property, including but not
limited to the Machinery, Tooling, Consumables and any Goods ordered by the
Authority in accordance with clause 3.3 or the Commercial Model , and/or permit the
Authority or its personnel nominated by the Authority to collect any of these items (at
the Authority’s sole option);"

freddieboy, your good long term genuine holder friend benny hill has something he needs to tell you

Freddieboy 21st Nov:
"Spot on Benny a Hill ....and they don't like it when we give them back a tiny % of what they've given genuine #ODX shareholders over months and months"

Benny hill today
"I'm only glad I recently greatly reduced my holding"

Yeah, I said nothing more from me, but I'll do this post then nothing until after the "presentation"

This CEO clearly does not fully comprehend the important aspects of contracts that he is signing.

It is only a few months ago that in response to a FOI letter from HMG that said Gov were under no obligation to provide a test to ODX, that he said that the contract said HMG had to provide ODX a test.

And now today, we learn that the Gov contract has expired. I note that in telling us it expired, there was no mention of getting money. So no indication of gov paying cancelling fees....it wasn't cancelled, it expired. Clearly there was a term in there that allowed it to expire, of which we were not advised....and looks like ODX didn't understand.

So it is clear that his earlier unequivocal declaration that gov had to provide a test to ODX was just plain wrong. So, what use a CEO that does not understand extremely important elements of the contracts that he signs ? What about other contracts, the DAM contract, the contract with ABDX, the royalty agreement with Mologic. ODX have demonstrated that we can have no confidence in anything they say in their interpretation of contracts that they enter into.

And in case this all sounds familiar,... It was only because of ADBX floatation that we learned from the ABDX prospectus (NOT from ODX) that the HMG antibody contract could be terminated by the gov if there was no MHRA self-test approval by 24th..and hey presto contract was terminated. Given what has happened, it looks possible ODX did not comprehend that clause either

ODX may be good at the chemistry and associated skills in being able to manufacture tests, but it is now clear that they are seriously lacking in business skill and marketing. They need in-house contract specialists, and not relying on an external solicitors office.

Also, when did ODX learn the contract had expired ?....it can NOT be classified as not financially significant, so they were under obligation to advise the market as soon as they became aware. So unless they only became aware yesterday, why was the market not advised ?

that's really all you can say about that.
complete feckin s*itshow.

nothing else from me today

dozy bugger, revenue is not profit

after several paragraphs of doom you get to the point where the expert says "no need to be overly concerned..."
Which is pretty par for the course for the Daily Mail.

best of luck all, I'm north of 100K shares and south of breakeven by over 10p

Overall, thats a reasonable assessment from bigbang, although I would take issue with some of the numbers. We well know the contract is not for £375M, in fact its possible it might not happen at all .The several million referred to is actually just under £3M, but HMG had also loaned machinery, but it is reserved for MHG and can not be used for anything else until told otherwise.

in terms of "What more could ODX or CK have done over the last 18 months to improve the shareholders position?", I would suggest they should have ensured that more of their destiny was in their own hands, currently nearly even major influence on whether ODX manufactures LFTS is outside their control. I would also suggest that ODX have been sluggish in applying for some approvals.

Personally I would change the subject from "HOLD HARD", to "HOLDING, but it is very hard doing so"

Just to be clear are OG test chinese crap at the moment, or the best test ever...it appears to be based on whether ODX is repackaging them.

And Wallbrook has already told us this is not financially significant, So other than someone figuring out how to use their zoom camera, these pictures are of no importance.

The fact that FDA recently said that those tests that have been supported with US money (such as Mologic via Radx) would get priority in the approval process was the one bit of positive news we've had in terms of certification/qualification. And there also does appear to have been a bit of acceleration of FDA approval. Be great if we could find one instance of when one was submitted and then approved, might help to set expectations.

strange you never mention "farcical" when people were building a fanciful story around a few dodgy twitter pics,, or when people where categorically saying there would be an RNS on last FRI or monday for sure based on a DAM tweet.

Seeing the reality as farcical but the baseless ramping as not, is revealing.