Byotrol Share Discussion Threads

[mudbath] 20/8/2015 16:21

Shroder.

Thats assuming a rebalancing act ++ carrying the logo.

Tesco and Boots will not enthuse over either,imo.

[mudbath] 20/8/2015 16:13

Dr Francis sees the industry backed into a "no win" corner.
It is difficult not to sympathise.

Without doubt BYOT urgently required the latest placing in order to fund an odd dossier!

"As with many implementations of legislation, timings, cost and even process are still a moving feast, but conservative estimates suggest investment in resource to prepare the dossier, generating additional data and the fees to be paid could set a manufacturer back hundreds of thousands of pounds per formulation/ dossier. This is likely to have a dramatic impact on the number of biocides and formulations available to industry and the dossier costs, which will be passed on in some ways to consumers. Many small businesses who are integral to the chemical industry are likely to fall as their pockets won’t be deep enough nor do they have the luxury of armies of regulatory experts at the disposal of the larger players.”

[shroder] 20/8/2015 16:03

I am glad to see you lot read my posts, especially the one below which covers future labeling requirements.

______________________________________


Shroder 11 Aug'15 - 14:02 - 2664 of 2702 0 0 edit

Shirley this has to good for lil ól Byotrol in the long run.

"Biocidal Product Regulations

Then there is the implementation of Biocidal Product Regulations. The biocides themselves have been or are being reviewed and in some cases are no longer supported for use. The number of available biocides for use across all of the different 22 Product Types (including Food – PT4) has decreased from well over 750 to now less than 250, and it becomes apparent that the selection of the right biocide to meet all of these challenges is becoming increasingly difficult."

[shroder] 20/8/2015 15:54

..I think it's self-evident that it reflects the strong demand for bleach based hand sanitizers.

One can barely walk down the corridor of our local hospital for buckets of bleach scattered everywhere, mind you they are those bright orange ones from B & Q.


..do I need to add a smiley..

[supernumerary] 20/8/2015 15:44

First time I've seen that 2 tranche issue game. Presumably just a way of getting out of an open offer? Doesn't look very investor-friendly, but I suppose the market price will fall below the subscription price, so holders will probably be able to buy in the market at the same price, possibly even allowing for the EIS benefits.

And can someone tell me why the Solvay deal is supposed to be so good? It looks like another increased costs and halved margins deal to me - the last thing they need.

[brownson] 20/8/2015 14:53

Battlebus

You're quite right. I can no longer be persuaded of the potential of this company. Its a write off as far as I'm concerned. Hey Ho. Only money

[battlebus2] 20/8/2015 14:51

Hi Timbo, your wasting time trying to persuade Brownson.

[brownson] 20/8/2015 14:27

Of course they are paid, and nowhere near enough in my view. As they say, " you pay peanuts........... " LOL

[timbo003] 20/8/2015 14:13

....and the directors of Byotrol are paid or unpaid?

[brownson] 20/8/2015 14:01

Depends if they're paid or unpaid directors

[timbo003] 20/8/2015 13:53

Brownson, directors don't qualify for EIS tax breaks.

[brownson] 20/8/2015 13:49

And there we have it. The directors manage to get cheap shares at the expense of both the PIs and the taxpayer. Well done.

[timbo003] 20/8/2015 13:44

I was fortunate enough to get the chance to participate in the placing, it's EIS qualifying, so effective purchase price of 2.175p/share courtesy of HMRC

[battlebus2] 20/8/2015 13:21

I don't think you could be any more gloomy. This is terrific news imv.

[brownson] 20/8/2015 13:16

I dont see it as good news. It merely means they are out of cash AGAIN. With no sign of where any cash generation is going to come from it makes me ever more gloomy.

[battlebus2] 20/8/2015 13:13

Excellent news with the placing for 1.4 million by new and existing shareholders.

[supernumerary] 20/8/2015 11:53

timbo - I appreciate the sentiment, but it's usually the giants who prosper in the face of regulatory oversight - they can afford the reformulation and testing costs, or pay for the advertising required to convince consumers that their brands are above all that sort of thing.

[mudbath] 20/8/2015 11:26

Timbo003
Thanks for the link

"4. CONCLUSION
1. Taking into account the scientific data provided, SCCS is requested to give its opinion on
the safety of Polyaminopropyl Biguanide (PHMB) when used as a preservative in cosmetics
products up to a maximum concentration of 0.3%.
On the basis of the data available, the SCCS concludes that Polyaminopropyl Biguanide
(PHMB) is not safe for consumers when used as a preservative in all cosmetic products up
to the maximum concentration of 0.3%.
The safe use could be based on a lower use concentration and/or restrictions with regard to
cosmetic products' categories. Dermal absorption studies on additional representative
cosmetic formulations are needed.
2. SCCS is requested to address any further scientific concerns on the ingredient
Polyaminopropyl Biguanide (PHMB) in particular regarding its use in spray formulation.
On the basis of the data available, the SCCS concludes that Polyaminopropyl Biguanide
(PHMB) is not safe for consumers when used as a preservative in cosmetic spray
formulations up to a concentration of 0.3%.
PHMB is used in a variety of applications other than cosmetics. General exposure data from
sources others than cosmetics should be submitted for the assessment of the aggregate
exposure of PHMB."

[brownson] 20/8/2015 11:25

I don't think "nimble" is a term which I would apply to Byotrol. "Ponderous" "Laggard" yes."nimble" no

[timbo003] 20/8/2015 11:06

The source document detailing the deliberations leading up to the recommendation regarding PHMB appears to be this one:


It seems that the industry has had plenty of prior warning that this has been coming along, so no doubt they have been looking at ways to work around it.

Short term this is clearly a problem, but in the medium to long term, surely it's an opportunity for any nimble and innovative companies to come up with acceptable alternatives which are effective and free from intimidating labels (hopefully for shareholders, Byotrol is one of them).

[supernumerary] 20/8/2015 10:35

mud - you quoted the Telegraph, not the others.

If that's your idea of reassurance, I'd hate to have you alongside me on a sinking ship ;¬)

Not sure how your buyout would work - why would anyone offer PIs 4p when the current price is 3.25p bid and there's an unresolved existential threat to the company?

[mudbath] 20/8/2015 10:28

Each paper carried its own version supernumerary.

Reassurance ?

Yes;for BYOT to follow my much promoted strategy.
Forget the over regulated and forever regulated food and hygiene divisions and focus exclusively on the profitable pet sector.
Get rid of the expensive research facilities and cull the BOD.
Promote Jane Kiely to CEO.
Give the PI a chance to exit at say 4pence and delist or similar.
Byotrol could on this revised basis be a nice little earner for stakeholders imo.
As things stand we could see a deterioration in sentiment.
No wonder Ruffer have been significantly reducing.

[supernumerary] 20/8/2015 10:09

mud - it would have been helpful to have posted the full link, rather than just the excerpt, in order to give people some context. It looks at first glance like a minor (possibly major) disaster for byo - does anybody have anything reassuring to say?

[brownson] 20/8/2015 09:41

I would have expected a statement from the company as one assumes it will affect profitability ( whatever that is)