Sphere Medical Share Discussion Threads

[timbo003] 21/3/2017 08:36

Link to annual report for year ending December 2016 (published today) is here:


No date given for the AGM which I would like to attend this year.

>>>>CC looks like I might not make it to the meeting on Thursday, if I don't make it, try to pin him down on director share purchases (where are they?)

[cc2014] 20/3/2017 13:10

Agreed Del - I'm more interested it the tone and body language.

[del44] 20/3/2017 12:15

Unless we get a sales update before then....I can only see it been more of the same...
But good luck to the both of you and have a good evening....

[cc2014] 19/3/2017 20:02

I'm going but will have to leave just after 9 to get the last train home as I'm not staying in London on Thursday night.
Looking forward to seeing you there Tim.

It looks like Valirx may have pulled out - it's not clear.

[del44] 09/3/2017 19:55

Short video from SPHR.....

[timbo003] 07/3/2017 22:45

I will definitely go along on March 23rd, so hopefully I will see you there CC.

[cc2014] 06/3/2017 23:22

I am tempted to go. A Sphere/Valirix double bill would be an interesting follow up to their last double bill around September especially after George from Valirix "it bloody works"
I'm have to make a decision as I am currently planning to do something else.

[del44] 06/3/2017 21:27

Another presentation.....

[cinquepercento] 06/3/2017 12:17

Re:Sphere medical proxima 3 and now 4 blood analytic device:
Yes,this share/company could eventually make serious sales and then it would take off.
As others have stated,this is a well thought out,labour saving,time saving and error avoiding device.
There is nothing wrong with the product,quite the contrary.
The company just needs to relentlessly and skillfully find a way to sell the product in useful quantities.
What we seem to keep hearing here is that the lack of meaningful sales is entirely due to the red tape,apathy and bureaucracy in the hospital systems, that lack of meaningful sales is not Sphere Medical's fault in any way.
What we do not seem to be hearing is: how Sphere Medical is going to find a way around this .
New blood is needed to step over any obstacles and sell Proxima Four more agressively or more intelligently.
The sales team needs to pick up the pace.
I will hang onto my shares till the situation ends either way.
Time for my medication.

Cinque Percento.

[pugugly] 03/3/2017 12:08

ls:> Excellent summary - imo unless sales traction is swiftly established this could go the way of many "must have"!! small medical device companies - if I was not worried re either a placing or similar dilutive funding from which PI's are excluded I would start building a position - However not all chairmen are as supportive of PI's as DB of SCE.
This also applies to HAYT which is looking interesting but also needs a relativly large equity injection (imo) - Trust you are well -

[longshanks] 03/3/2017 09:35

I am so tempted to buy.Just looking at the strength of support given both by IIs and SVB make me feel there must be some value here.There largest competitor is market inertia and it is worth examining that.Whilst it is logical to expect medical practitioners to welcome a device that will improve both quality and efficiency of care, there is still a capital cost of implementation, an operating cost for consumables, a need to add a new consumable into the stocking and planning processes and a requirement to train staff. To my mind, inertia to such change is very difficult to challenge. In addition, there is so little competition in European health care that even public demand for a change to such technology will meet deaf ears.This product could well gain traction but I think we are two to three years from break-even.They do need to raise money in the near future; I don't think £7m is enough, I think they need nearer £12m.Given the current share price, a placing to finance commercialisation would be horribly dilutive. Hence the use of SVB whilst they "evaluate financing options".A likely scenario is that they have a capital profit-sharing deal with an outfit like Lanstead. In essence there is a placing, but instead of upfront cash, the company get a monthly payment linked to the current share price. If the share price rises, the payments go up pro-rata (and vice-versa of course).IMM did a similar deal last year and whilst many expected a "death spiral" in the share price, the opposite happened.In that regard, buying now may prove quite an astute move.Dilemmas, dilemmas.

[del44] 02/3/2017 22:24

I agree with you Tim...on both counts...Yes he does look similar to your chancellor.... but I too had expected an open offer (before the SVB loan announcement) at this year's results.....and had thought it factored in.
So what next. The CFO has said that they are very aware that the market will be watching for signs of some traction in sales...in the next few months.....
I think the SVB loan may be an indicator in advance.
But then....I am a very long term holder, so I would say that wouldn't I?
Accumulated a few more recently, on the back of no new issuing of equity!!!!!

[timbo003] 02/3/2017 21:14

On a slightly tangential topic: has anyone else noticed that Richard Wright bears more than a passing resemblance to our beloved Chancellor of the Exchequer: Philip Hammond

[timbo003] 02/3/2017 20:55

>>>PU

Yes indeed, although had I assumed (incorrectly?) that those factors were already in the price prior to results.

[pugugly] 02/3/2017 13:02

timbo003: Worries about funding (imo) Risk of low ball placing or dilutive convertible loan.

[timbo003] 02/3/2017 06:24

I haven't seen either video yet Del and I probably won't do so until the weekend (the WiFi at this hotel sucks).

I'm surprised at the share price reaction to the results, the outlook now seems somewhat better than I was expecting.

[cc2014] 01/3/2017 21:40

I have had plenty of time to digest the implications of the loan and come to the following conclusion.

The loan is not fully repayable until 2020 and the interest rate of 7% is commercially more than reasonable given the risk.

This leads you to the conclusion that SPHR will still be around in 2020 and this can only happen if the major shareholders support a further injection of funds or the sales uptake is so fast this is not required (or a hybrid of the two).

However you cut this SVB have seen something which leads them to believe they will get their money back and presumably build a long term relationship with SPHR.

[del44] 01/3/2017 21:17

Cheers Tim...

[del44] 01/3/2017 21:16

The previous open offers were both issued at the full year announcements...one @ 40p and another @ 16p
Until the SVB loan, I was expecting another OO this time. However I felt that the IIs were probably not as open to it this time round and maybe they were not. The fact that they are looking at ways to raise funds leads me to believe that the present institutional investors are wanting more on sales. Other then the 7% interest payment, I don't know any other conditions attached to the loan....
Either we have a product with no market or we have bad management in charge of a good product. In order to get more funding through issuing equity....then they must work harder...a lot bloody harder.....

[timbo003] 01/3/2017 16:22

Video from last week's Proactive meeting

[gnnmartin] 01/3/2017 14:55

I've just noticed that misread post 1063: I thought the meeting it announced was on 21 March. Since it was 21 February, I definitely won't be attending. :-O

Maybe I'll get to see them on April 1 at TW's UK Investor show. I still can't see taking on debt at this stage as sensible, if (as seems pretty certain) they will need to raise a lot more cash from the market. Debt tends to come with conditions (covenants, security requirements) that can reduce the ability to attract more money from elsewhere. Add in the fact that while it is impressive even though unwise if they have raised $3m at 7% with no hidden strings, I suspect that there must be hidden strings: the lender can work out as easily as anyone else that the risk for Sphere is that they run out of cash. For the shareholder, the upside is as impressive as the downside: for a lender, downside is still impressive but the upside is just 7% per annum, so Silicon Valley Bank will have taken care that their money is secure even if Sphere don't make it. Or perhaps SV were given a juicy enough package of options that enables them to share in the upside.

[greenrichard] 28/2/2017 19:02

Interview with the CEO

[dr biotech] 28/2/2017 17:41

Sales and marketing plus operating expenses (not product development) about £3m. WTF do these people do? For almost negligible sales. If this was a start up with their own money they would pay themselves less and be a lot more efficient.

Can't see this making it, shame as the idea is decent enough and the sort of business the UK needs.