Cobra Bio-manufacturing Share Discussion Threads

[jdb2005] 09/4/2009 10:05

D*c - time will tell who is on the right track and who has been left in the siding. Good Luck with your other investments.

[jdb2005] 09/4/2009 08:50

Ali - See where you are coming from now and can only say your comments about their Chairman are spot on. Dare not ask what your breakeven might be.

Now we have Simon Saxby who is no push over and is getting his company back on the tracks to profitability. Mr & Mrs Dixon have sunk millions into Cobra and will want to see better performance in months ahead. These are the two main factors why IMHO now is the right time to pick up CBF and run with it.

[alibongo612] 09/4/2009 08:42

Your posts appear motivated by putting down d*c rather than insightful analysis.

Cobra has hardly turned round it is fragile.

At best it is significantly dependent on biotechs for business who in turn are dependent on the market for funding.

Those of us with longer memories have seen this decline from circa £1.50 principally for serial underperformance in part for the reasons above and in part for the management.

They have a new CEO yes but the rest of the Board are unchanged since flotation and remain presided over by the same Chairman albeit now non exec.

Imo Cobra has it all to do to survive never mind remain independent

[jdb2005] 09/4/2009 08:09

Buzzzzzzz - I have to laugh at the d*c who seems to be unable to comprehend what Cobra have done in the last 12 months to turn the business round.

He does not even know who their customers are let alone what constitutes their £11m order book. They are winning new orders because of the qulaity of their work. Here in UK, Europe, USA, Japan etc.

Hence he has to resort to saying things could go wrong - he is still smarting from the MDX bombshell even though some of us advised him to avoid - and may feel he has not funds now to invest in a company that is on the rise. Perhaps he should find a real job instead of dreaming up his what if scenarios. He would then be able to invest in companies that are recovering in 2009/2010.

He admits he does not even have 1 CBF share to his name - I fail to see how things will change for him if he does not follow leads !!!
Watch SLN & CRA who are looking good bets also - plus NPH & RENE (more risky) but possible multi-baggers.

Still I fear we will have to read all his negativity even when the shares are 10p plus.

[buzzzzzzzz] 09/4/2009 05:27

Boadicea

I gave up the will to live 25 posts back!!!! LOL!

The doc and jDB are tenacious, are they not, I'd have them in my corner anyday!!!

[alibongo612] 08/4/2009 19:13

Assuming they have the funds in these constrained times as well as the inclination

[the_doctor] 08/4/2009 17:42

Yes, posted earlier boadicea

"Hence you can safely assume that those parts of their property which qualify as security for a loan have already been pledged in one way or another which duly explains the constraint to raise cash by a share issue. It would not have been the route of choice in any other circumstances."

Fwiw, as long as the order book remains healthy, then I suspect that folk like the Dixons would provide either an unsecured bridging loan, or would take a further placing, if required, rather than see their investment go down the pan.

[the_doctor] 08/4/2009 17:40

Good constructive post jdb.

"It is a stringent test that indicates whether the company has enough short-term assets"

Agreed

So will you perhaps calculate it for us here then please?

Unless I made a mistake (and I may have done), calculating it for Cobra shows exactly what you meant not to, doesnt it!??
I provided the numbers earlier - current liabilities exceed current assets.
Now, I dont see that as a problem as such actually, but I'm not sure what you were trying to show?


'They employ teams of QA experts who check and validate the company's work.'
I dont doubt it. Given that I was both one of those experts (not at Cobra, although I've worked with people that worked there) and subsequently managed such a team, I'm very familiar with the area. :o)

However, it is precisely because of that experience that I know how easily unexpected problems can crop up with biologic products, even in validated processes - expecially where switching between products or not having the luxury of the processes being 'bedded in' for years.

I'd note that it is also perhaps because of my association with the biotech industry that I want to see the companies succeed - but that doesnt stop me giving genuine views on a bb, particularly not where those views wont make any difference to the company.

[boadicea] 08/4/2009 17:35

Sorry, I gave up reading about 25 posts back. However there are a couple of earlier points concerning raising capital on property.

Those who have been around here long enough will remember that CBF have already carried out a sale and lease-back operation to raise capital - in ~2006, from memory. That cannot be repeated. The process is also generally restricted to property which has a ready use - e.g. general office accommodation, warehousing etc - items that any company might need. In the case of CBF that excludes all the facilities special to their business but which account for a high proportion of the valuation. (That incidentally is a key feature of the 'going concern' criteria, that the value is appropriate within the business but not without.)
Hence you can safely assume that those parts of their property which qualify as security for a loan have already been pledged in one way or another which duly explains the constraint to raise cash by a share issue. It would not have been the route of choice in any other circumstances.

Anyway, good luck to those who are committed to the company - not least the Dixons!

[jdb2005] 08/4/2009 17:23

D*c the acid test is all about having sufficient working capital to meet immediate liabilities.

It is a stringent test that indicates whether the company has enough short-term assets to cover its immediate liabilities without selling inventory. The acid-test ratio is far more strenuous than the working capital ratio, primarily because the working capital ratio allows for the inclusion of inventory assets.

What you must know is that a balance sheet represents the picture at a certain date. It does not reflect the latest position as of today.
Cobra's cash balances are being carefully managed by their CFO.
Customers pay a down-payment that covers materials & staff costs. They then are required according to their contracts to pay regular instalments as work in progress is signed off to them. The company's two plants are fully GMP compliant. They employ teams of QA experts who check and validate the company's work. Their standards have to be high because of the nature of their work and the need to avoid cross-contamination or accidents happening.

[the_doctor] 08/4/2009 16:17

Hyper

No problem

The difference between your 4288 and the one below it is telling!



"Cobra is not on a knife edge nor is it short of working capital"

jdb!
I didnt say they are short of working capital.
I said that as per the going concern comments made by the company, there will be IF orders are delayed again.
Being in the industry, I respect how easily that sort of thing can happen.
I'm still waiting for you to explain the acid test, or was that just another baseless comment that you'll be too ashamed to admit to??

[jdb2005] 08/4/2009 16:07

Phoney - Can you tell me when you contacted Cobra and asked them pertinent questions ?? It seems you just want to be noticed. You must have got fed up with OXB and MDX or have the Guys there told you where to go ??

Cobra is not on a knife edge nor is it short of working capital.
Ask Simon Saxby although I think he will choose to ignore your pretentions at being an analyst.

[hyper al] 08/4/2009 16:06

the_doctor

Thanks for your explanation, I respect it.

[hyper al] 08/4/2009 15:33

the_doctor

I have seen you post on many threads, but don't think I have seen you in such a negative mode before.

Why, are you like this wth CBF? I get your point of view, but you keep repeating it.

[the_doctor] 08/4/2009 15:28

"some pharmas see them as considerably undervalued at 3-4p."

To get back to facts, the share price was nearer 1.5p before the announcement.
We only know they probably saw it as undervalued at that level, not this new level.

Look what happened at CET! Although to note, I dont expect that to be the case here (unless the approach is from the Dixons).

[jdb2005] 08/4/2009 15:20

ImaB - Just ignore as there is no way you could treat OCD - they rely on talking to themselves. Knew a Guy who wrote a book on Hidden Voices. Now that was a facsinating read.

If there is bitterness by some PIs it will because they followed D Thatcher and bought in the 40-50p range. But if they had applied stop losses they would have avoided too much pain.

Now with Simon Saxby there is a new man at the helm, entirely different approach -an astute business man with vast pharma/biotech experience.
They have more contracts coming in and gaining international recognition for their development of new vaccines. Their list of clients is impressive.

Simon Saxby BSc (Hons), Chief Executive OfficerSimon Saxby has 25 years experience in the biotechnology industry, latterly as CEO of Alpha Biologics Sdn Bhd, a Malaysian contract manufacturing organisation with an office and laboratories in Cambridge,UK. Simon was a founder of Murex Diagnostics, which was sold to Abbott Laboratories for $350m, a co-founder and Operations Director of Quantum Biosystems Ltd, he led the development of a CMO business for Unisyn Technologies in Massachusetts, USA for 5 years and has held appointments with KS Biomedix Plc, Xenova Group PLC and Synexis Ltd.

This is how he describes Cobra:

"Cobra is a leading cGMP compliant contract manufacturer of biopharmaceuticals. Our expertise and over 15 years of experience in producing biopharmaceuticals, including proteins, viruses, DNA and cells for use in pre-clinical to Phase III clinical trials, are the overwhelming reasons why our clients from the global life sciences market partner with Cobra."

More orders/contracts should enable Cobra to remain independent - however it looks as though some pharmas see them as considerably undervalued at 3-4p.

[imabastard] 08/4/2009 12:52

OCD .... yawn.

[imabastard] 08/4/2009 12:40

Boring nonetheless .... you believe that other investors who have risked their funds (unlike you) are not fully aware of the risks .... you are deluded by a false premise assuming that you are the 'saviour' of the investing world waving a multitude of 'beware' banners and without your unending input, will be swept away with the tide of financial ignorance. Your biggest crime is the repetition with which you boringly emphasise the same old facets relating to the risk.

I'm not in the slightest bit worried as you imply .... just bored to tears reading your painfully tedious posts.

Yawn .... zzzz

[the_doctor] 08/4/2009 12:33

Sorry IAMAB, you clearly have issues accepting a realistic view of Cobra.

'ad nauseum' you claim?
Much of the discussion has only been mentioned for the first time today!


And I'll tell you what, I bet some genuine holders here prefer to hear balanced and fact-based views, rather than the waffle and bs ramps from some!

Ramper lie: cash isnt an issue
Truth: any order delays an they'll need more cash, as indicated by the going concern discussion in the financial statements


Ramper lie: they can borrow money on assets or orders
Truth: The robust assets are already secured against in an existing loan. Other assets can probably not be borrowed against, hence the placing before.


Ramper lie: the acid test shows value
Truth: Er, it doesnt if you actually calculate it


the discussion here wont make ANY difference to a bid or orders, so you have nothing to worry about.

[the_doctor] 08/4/2009 12:26

Trouble is IMO, the true present value is difficult to ascertain since visibility concerning longer-term cash flows or its ability become profitable and remain so, is limited.

I guess it all boils down to what exactly a bidder wants, how much they want it and how confident the company/ major shareholders are that revenue growth can be maintained. The order scare in the last few months is likely to have put the wind up them - I wonder if that was a deliberate ploy by the buyer to help get it on the cheap?