Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Eden LSE:EDEN London Ordinary Share GB0001646941 ORD 1P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  +0.00p +0.00% 9.125p 8.75p 9.50p - - - 0 06:30:09
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology 0.4 -1.9 -1.0 - 18.89

Eden (EDEN) Latest News

More Eden News
Eden Takeover Rumours

Eden (EDEN) Share Charts

1 Year Eden Chart

1 Year Eden Chart

1 Month Eden Chart

1 Month Eden Chart

Intraday Eden Chart

Intraday Eden Chart

Eden (EDEN) Discussions and Chat

Eden Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
22/2/201800:38Eden Research3,369
07/3/201713:47Eden Research- The Natural Solution172
27/2/201611:20Eden Research- The Natural Solution3
18/5/201201:24Eden Research6
17/5/201215:00The sterile garden of Eden118

Add a New Thread

Eden (EDEN) Most Recent Trades

Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
2018-02-21 16:24:168.8060052.80O
2018-02-21 16:22:218.8060052.80O
2018-02-21 13:11:548.9330,0002,679.00O
2018-02-21 12:53:398.7920,0001,758.00O
2018-02-21 11:30:469.0060,9575,486.13O
View all Eden trades in real-time

Eden (EDEN) Top Chat Posts

Eden Daily Update: Eden is listed in the Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker EDEN. The last closing price for Eden was 8.75p.
Eden has a 4 week average price of 8p and a 12 week average price of 7.75p.
The 1 year high share price is 13.13p while the 1 year low share price is currently 7.75p.
There are currently 207,064,337 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 71,485 shares. The market capitalisation of Eden is £18,894,620.75.
investingisatrickygame: PaulPaolo, The Company will now be in a closed period for sure meaning Director buys are not possible. However, as Northwick has pointed out, this is not always so and therefore Directors could have purchased shares in the past. This of course requires 1) personal funds and 2) belief that they will make money. They earn good money, but I never assume, to be fair to any Director, that they have available funds. They could still be in a closed period post results IF Terpene Tech, Bayer or any other news is still due, not yet released and thought to be significant enough to move the share price. I have to laugh a bit at this last statement because although it is fact, nothing ever moves the Eden share price!!!!! I wonder why:) ? A downside to Director purchases in the sometimes misplaced timing and generosity of the Remuneration Committee who award options to Directors of Plc Companies, particularly small AIM listed companies where roles often overlap. The option awards, nearly always adjusted by new options if the old options are not or do not look like being 'in the money' are a deterrent from Directors purchasing shares as they are nearly always over generous and the milestones of achievement very rarely are in line with share price performance. So the award structure and catalyst to exercise are wrong. All Directors of listed companies should be exposed to share price and capital risk. This should be mandatory, once again, so they are truly aligned with investors. Until that is so, there will never be a level playing field.
investingisatrickygame: Paulpaolo, It is a concern isn't it, little or no trading in Eden and the question of why. To be honest, I think the answer is very simple and can be split as follows:- 1) Long standing shareholders in at much higher prices probably feel they have little more to lose so their shares sit redundant. Add this to the 'institutional' holdings as per the published share register information on Eden's website and this likely accounts for an enormous amount of the 207 million shares in issue 2) Assuming the above to be correct, this means that few new investors have come into Eden in any meaningful way 3) A primary reason for this in my opinion, is that Eden chooses not to properly communicate its story and therefore the investment proposition. As a result, few are motivated to buy in and a lot more won't even know about Eden. So, Eden's investment reach is very poor 4) Those that do know about Eden, but have not invested, possibly see it as a slow burn and again, see no impetus or corporate direction to instil an alternative belief The net and understandable result is no momentum in Eden's share price, a likely vastly undervalued Eden share price and a tremendous lack of investment eyes monitoring Eden. RNS informs us what has happened Investor Communications communicates understanding to us and reasons why we should invest and is therefore a driver for the share price Eden, sadly, only participates (because it is regulatory) in the RNS channel and defacto abandons the share price and those invested who sit on zero gains. It's morally wrong in my book. You participated in an IPO, sold your initial story, raised your money, went back to the market a few times for more money and yet you build no relationship with your investors to feel good about the prospects of making a return. So people could sell out as you say, but I expect people to stay invested and on any good news that propels the share price, I anticipate a tsunami of selling. This of course, should it happen, would require Eden to consider this eventuality and have a plan for 'others' to mop up those shares and thus have a new share register with possibly a higher floor under the share price. By the way, can someone please elaborate on one thing that Powerscourt has brought to the table or executed since their appointment 5 months ago. Massively disappointing, but all so predictable and consistent with PR firms appointed. What a waste of money!
investingisatrickygame: littlealbatross2 So in reality there are very few voices here given the 207 million shares in issue. Wherever you go online, Eden is barely talked about. Why is this? Given the general sentiment here Eden are lucky. If Eden were one of the more popular stocks with this sentiment their image would not be derived from their own website, but here on Share bulletin boards where private investors reside, where they communicate with each other, share with each other and sometimes learn from each other, because those learnings are not forthcoming from the Company. AIM companies image and persona can often be cultivated on places like ADVFN, triple I and others. Why? Because companies fail to deliver that much needed non- regulatory information that these investors seek. I and many others have seen it many times. Companies and their PR agents can then become powerless to change this image of the company and correct it. Sometimes old school board members fear social media (if this is what we are calling this) rather than embracing it. image can be everything (This is part of the role of a PR firm is it not, so somewhat undeniable). If Eden were a FTSE 100 company then commentary on these BB's would be of little relevance, but they are not, they are an £18 million minnow who needs to cultivate a reputation in the investment world, who need to create a good image, who need to be seen as a board who deliver operationally and on time, who needs to ensure that investors and potential investors alike understand their business sectors, their products and services, their point(s) of difference vis-à-vis the competition, their potential market and geographic impact and footprint. In other words, all the reasons to invest. I'm personally staggered that Eden are so dogged and resilient in not changing this modus operandi in specific relation to investor demand and the need for more information, when they can clearly see that to do so is so dangerous to their share price, their market cap, their cost of funds (historically), the Company's image, their personal image and more. Those City boys that are invested may see Eden's image as intact, but that shareholder base is not managing, controlling, influencing the share price so that is one image, if positive, that doesn't need changing. Eden needs different approaches and solutions for different markets and given what it is that Eden does with its products in different geographies, it should be easy to understand that this is so in the shareholder register 'market'. I genuinely feel sorry for your 20 years here, whatever the reasons for that may be. For sure, Eden owes its shareholders both a greater insight and a greater share price today, giving options to all those invested and not invested as to what they would like their future investment relationship with Eden to be.
investingisatrickygame: I think you should all take a look at this Then if you do not know about Proactive, read this (Very strange, each time I put in their web address and 'about us' it gets deleted). Michael Walters, Eden's 'friend' has not the subscribers, the reach or the tools of today to elevate Eden's share price. Proactive are the dominant force in this space and have been for some while. A J Bell Media would be a recognised competitor. Eden chooses not to be expansive with its story and has cited that its partner relationships sometimes prohibit them. Eden has presented to Institutions and also had Analysts meetings, so it clearly seeks to A) Widen and share its story B) Attract inward investment, albeit in the open market C) Have institutions on the Company's Share Register From this we can deduce that there is NO REASON not to share the story with individual and private investors, that inward investment in the open market would be welcome and that an upwardly mobile share price would help facilitate C) above. In sharing it with PI's you also get to share it, efficiently, with everyone else (all shareholders and potential shareholders) I know a bit about Proactive and have delivered very successful independent communications via film using them as my distributor. Can anyone believe that Eden really doesn't want their share price to increase and to have the benefit of a distributor such as Proactive whose audience reach goes as far as Sydney, Frankfurt, Toronto and New York and this is before film watchers refer it to a friend. An interesting fact is that 68% of those that watch a video, refer it to a friend. An interesting alignment is that PI's always refer a stock to a friend when they are hopeful or excited about a stock or are already making money in it. The story becomes self perpetuating. The two are interlinked, yet Eden is disconnected by virtue of not engaging in this very valuable route to a shareholder audience and an increasing share price which ultimately gets them to their end game. A city based Share Register that likely requires minimal engagement with PI's Why?
investingisatrickygame: Re Terpene Tech, I think the Company should look to explain this relationship in commercial terms as well as soon as there is the product(s) launch. Eden has a 29.9% interest in Terpene Tech. I assume Eden will receive some kind of royalty in regards to the encapsulation element, but the revenues from product sales will sit within Terpene Tech, the Company, and a private company at that. Eden will continue to account for this interest in its Accounts, but how will the value translate to Eden's share price? Would Eden need to sell its interest at some point to realise the cash on the balance sheet? Might Terpene one day float and Eden's 29.9% can then have a visible Mcap value?(hopefully one that is aligned to significant commercial success, should that happen) Might Terpene Tech reverse in Eden? How will Eden realise value into its own share price through its relationship and investment in Terpene Tech? Would anybody like to answer this? This is a different situation to direct product sales to distributors as currently is and direct sales to a Company, as I assume will be the case with Bayer. This is another revenue and value stream that will need explaining by Eden so that the market can more easily assess and value Eden through its listed share price. Sellers, aside of any personal financial need now, are likely selling because they can't see or understand any visible route to value on any timeline that you wish to choose. Buyers are not around for exactly the same reason plus others will not even be aware of Eden and its prospects. Again, there is no visible route to value that the market understands enough to make them want to buy. Existing shareholders are locked into a very long story as supersonico illustrated above with the Michael Walters article of 2011, 7 years ago!!!!!
investingisatrickygame: So we have some commentary to the positive on here. When I read that trading statement I hear Eden saying at the beginning post numbers "This was a good performance since the 2017 growing season was challenging for fungicidal products in many southern European countries due to hard frosts in April followed by high heat and drought in the summer. These well-documented conditions resulted in the smallest harvests in 60 years in key markets such as France and Italy." AND IN THEIR LAST LINE ""Despite challenging growing conditions in key territories and a shortened marketing campaign in France, we are pleased with the progress made in 2017 and we look forward to providing a further update when we report our full year results for the year ended 31 December 2017 in March." So they start on an excuse and finish on one too. Now we all know the story (presumably), but if you want to entice new money in from this RNS, where is the incentive to do so? There is no apparent need to jump in today and so there will be no northward mobilisation of the share price. EDEN do not know how to build a story or tell it. Where is their professional help, Powerscourt, in all of this? They have been on RNS's since the first of September 2017, employed since the first of October 2017 and we are now 3.5 months into their tenure, 25% in time of their annual contract. I don't think the market has heard anything from them. So what is the step-change that they have delivered since Eden removed Walbrook PR? I'm guessing Powerscourt is also more expensive per month than Walbrook. History shows that these PR companies are a waste of shareholder funds and operational funds. If Eden is a ground-breaking industrial biotech then why is Powerscourt unable to deliver a narrative? To me, this is quite remarkable. I can see that Eden has good products and potential. Biotech will also trade on excellent P/E's. Eden is looking at solving global agricultural issues. But where is the story,the building story? Where is the commitment to engage and deliver value into the share price? Where is the recognition of shareholder funds invested and the need to provide a return on invested capital? Where is the alignment between board and shareholder? To me there isn't one and so again, Eden is to blame for the share price and appears to learn nothing from the past. The RNS channel in isolation delivers no value to the Eden share price. The engagement of a hot shot communications firm has done nothing to assist the share price. Shore Capital are impotent so who cares what their broker note says. Overall, Eden is becoming very underwhelming. If the products and patents are that good, then come the commercial announcements of Bayer and TT, I wouldn't be surprised to perhaps see someone sniffing around with a very cheap offer that Eden would struggle to defend. And even if they did defend such a situation, I doubt shareholders would listen because there is no strong relationship between the two that would encourage shareholders to listen.
investingisatrickygame: Adding to that commentary, Eden share price is down 3.7% today on volume of around 400,000 shares versus shares in issue of 207 million. So one fifth of one per cent of the shares in issue have been traded. That indicates to me that no one has a reason to buy and very few wish to sell at such a low level. The result is no motivation in the stock. The longer that continues the harder it is to create and with any decent upward spike a raft of sales will occur with investors feeling relieved that they got out the right side of break even.
investingisatrickygame: supersonico "So for me the investment case is easy and clear" For you and me maybe, but investors generally it is not. The primary reason for this in my opinion, is Eden continues to resist introducing and yes, selling Eden to a wider private investor audience. Given all that you mention, they most certainly should be. There is no reason or restriction as to why they cannot. There is little danger of the share price getting ahead of itself if Eden were to embark on such an effort as the share price is so low. So who is giving Eden bad advice in this respect and why are Eden listening? You have to assume it lies at the door of Shore Capital and they are totally detached from Private Investors and do not engage with them. So, they are not the best placed people to advise on the same. "My question I have is why have Eastman , Bayer , Sipcam , Sumi-agro not bought us out? Eastman and Bayer are serial buyout merchants so why is Eden still independent??" Good question, but maybe that question could be delayed for another 3-4 months when Bayer is expected to be a customer. I personally don't believe, based on the current share register, that they could resist an unwanted bid or a lowly bid. All the more reason to go on the communication offensive and ensure the Company and its prospects and prospective value is well understood. Thus the price will rise and were a bid to come in it will then be at a higher price. "Does the licencing of different applications deter a Take over..any thoughts??" I believe this is a great reason to put in a cheap offer for Eden now, likely accepted by the majority of PI's which would swing the vote. The benefit of these other applications to any would be buyer e.g. Sipcam, is that they could then spin off everything outside of 3AEY and get their original purchase price of Eden back and likely a profit too. In other words whether it were Sipcam, Eastman or Bayer in the scenario you propose, they end up owning outright that part of Eden's business that they require. Relevant personnel and external partnerships then stay in place to maximise the new owners exit on the other patented offerings. Eden staying below the radar and they are well under the radar in real terms, makes them vulnerable. Eden going above the radar will increase their market cap (if done properly) and thus protect their perceived value and subsequent value for shareholders. It will be a crying shame and a farce if a cheap bid comes in and Eden go on the front foot trying to defend the unwanted bid having done nothing to educate and protect shareholders in all the time leading up to that point, including protecting the Company from the same.
investingisatrickygame: Eden has clearly gone commercial and in what we hope is a successful and profitable way. With Sipcam SpA being a major distributor in this sector and product creator, their chosen alliance and investment in Eden with a clause that restricts the selling of their shares for 3 years is a welcome one. Equally, so too will be their board appointment. This all adds commercial weight and gravitas to Eden's development and is very welcome. Eden has clearly developed a niche in both its slow release system and with its management of volatile terpenes, natures own defence mechanism. In fact, the very nature of controlling volatility to enable a product to work defensively against disease is a very creative one and one that evidently the majors hadn't thought to do or were unable to do. Patent protection will now secure Eden's ability to deliver revenue through commercial agreements that should deliver substantial profits. This is one side of Eden Research Plc's business, one collective product area and although some feel it has been slow, it is now here, it is real and management definitely deserve credit for delivering the same. Successful sales of 3AEY now rest, predominately with Sipcam SpA and Sumi-Agro France. In effect this should be a collective effort, one would assume, given their relationship to Sumitomo, whom I assume, are also keeping a keen eye on developments. I imagine they will be looking at Sipcam SpA to monitor how the collaborative elements of the arrangement unfold in regards to new product development, expansive use of Eden's Sustaine technology and extended patent life of existing SpA pesticides. I wouldn't mind betting that internally, they also have a value attached to the same which easily outweighs their £2 million stock investment in Eden. They will also see additional value back to them through an increase in Eden's market capitalisation. What I now hope to see is Eden and Sipcam manage their other product in their portfolio, namely their share price. Given its volatile nature, one could easily draw a line to the management of terpenes to create an easy understanding for the need to reduce negative volatility in their share price. The share price may arguably be stable now, but it is stable at a very low price, to the negative if you will. Some simple time and strategies to complement their operational product areas will be very welcome, especially now that they have some breathing space to do the same with 3AEY over the line and funds in the bank and on the way. Successfully delivering 3AEY gives Eden breathing space to now move on to other product developments, other commercial arrangements and more (notwithstanding Eden wants 3AEY registered in other countries around the globe). If Eden and Sipcam could successfully manage Eden's share price to fair value today, it would be for the benefit of both parties, reward institutional and retail shareholders who will no doubt feel more confident in spreading the word, whilst not necessarily selling up given the greater confidence and visibility they would then have. If they can manage volatile terpenes, I'm confident with all that they have to offer that they can manage a volatile share price. It is after all, one of the fundamental reasons that they, along with others, became a listed Plc.
the prophet: Beautiful day here and a delight to read the Eden thread without the puerile rubbish on the old one. Here is a good over-view of the Shore Capital note from the Michael Walters site. This is a free article, btw, so I'm it's ok for me to post it, with due recognition. Eden - Worth More, or Much More? - (EDEN) 30/11/15 (119264) Let's face it. None of us knows what Eden Research (EDEN) is really worth, no matter how long we have been watching, wishing, and hoping. When the issued capital was much smaller, ages ago, some of us paid many times the current price of 16.25p (up 1p) today. There are still hopes that we could see those levels, and more, again - but lending logic to that set of sums has always been elusive. The latest, and much the most convincing, attempt to add substance to the dreams comes from new house broker Shore Capital, which has a highly-rated research team in the small company/ food producers area. Signed by analyst Phil Carroll, written with the shares at 15p, this suggests a fair value of 22.5p, backed by a full revenue potential analysis citing fair value at 79p by projecting revenues out to 2019 then discounting. So we have the usual analytical guesswork which sticks a finger into a range of options, and pulls out a nice number. Peer more closely at the assumptions, and you arrive at anything between 63p and 16p (Shore chooses a conservative 22p) on the 'core' Eden business depending on whether you use a discount rate of 8% or 14% and a terminal growth rate of 1% of 4%. Apply the same discount and growth boundaries to the 'full revenue potential', and you come up with anything between 58p and 223p. Shore picks a cautious 79p. Do not assume that pointing to the vast variables in the Shore valuation method is a criticism. It is not. But it is worth emphasising that we are not talking absolutes here. We have a broker doing what brokers do, and attempting to give some measure of what Eden might be worth. We should be grateful for that, especially since predicting what might happen with Eden (or, rather, when it might happen) has never been easy. Rather than attempt to wade through full 31 pages of the Shore report, it is sensible here to assume that subscribers already know the basic Eden story pretty well - it is developing a series of benign products based on using combinations of three natural terpenes, applied via a patented system of encapsulating them in yeast particles which effectively spreads the delivery time when they are sprayed. There have been long delays getting them through the regulatory system, but the first approvals are in. The most immediate applications are in agri-chem, with a vast range of other possible uses, including animal and human healthcare, food ingredients, cosmetics and home and garden products. Five products are in various stages of development, led by 3AEY, which is about to start sales as a fungicide targeting botrytis, a disease which badly damages grapes. Then there is B2Y, a nematicide targeting soil pests and being evaluated by global giant Eastman (option until next March), 2EY, tackling powdery mildew, and GO-E, the encapsulation technology. Shore expects approval for 3AEY from remaining southern EU states either before the year-end or early in 2016, allowing sales in the next growing season. Companies associated with Japanese giant Sumitomo are partners with Eden to sell in the key grape-growing countries of Italy, Spain and France, and one of them (Sipcam) is evaluating two new products - 2EY (to treat powdery mildew) and 1EY (for apple scab). The other Sumitomo company also has rights to develop other Eden plant protection products. In Kenya, at last Lachlan has approval to sell 3AEY. Eden estimates the market for botryticides like 3AEY is $300m a year. B2Y, the nematicide being evaluated by Eastman and about to undergo the registration process adresses an estimated market worth $1.3bn a year (Eastman's market leader nematicide Metam is under significant pressure, says Shore). The powdery mildew product B2Y, going through registration and backed by a Sumitomo company, tackles a market worth about $750m a year, with particularly high value in Africa. There is a pipeline of other earlier stage products, including 1EY. The broker suggests Eden has a significantly reduced risk profile now that 3AEY has reached commercial sales, and other approvals will trigger milestone payments, helping Eden move into profitability in 2016, a major positive for a biotech company. The business model has significant leverage potential, with further deal potential with other companies in the global Sumitomo network. The same applies to the current option deal with Eastman, and Eden can licence GO-E encapsulation technology for use in industries outside agri-chem. It is currently licenced for head lice treatment with TerpeneTech and with Bayer in flea, tick and shampoo animal health products. Disappointingly, the broker does not expect volume Bayer sales to begin until 2017, with some early initial sales in 2016. Intriguingly, looking at GO-E, the broker uses the example cited in earlier Eden material. That points to Trifloxystrobin, one of Bayer's best-selling agrochemicals at $400m a year. That is now off-patent, but as an example could be used with GO-E to add benefits and extend patent life if co-encapsulated. Eden has often touted the potential benefits of such co-encapsulation opportunities for extending the life of chemical products for major companies, but has yet to conclude a deal, and has never formally said there were talks on such a deal with Bayer - but it keeps coming up (we know Bayer moves at the pace of a constipated tortoise). The broker suggests that Bayer Cropscience could be a potential source of deals in the future. It all adds up, sort of, to a set of core revenue assumptions which the broker splits between current agreements and those under evaluation. Current goes from 2015 revenues of £710,000 to £680,000, then to £1.9m for 2017, £2.61m for 2018, and £3.33m for 2019. Deals under evaluation are reckoned to bring in revenue in 2015 of £21,000, rising to £990,000, then to £1.33m, £3.54m, and £5.6m for 2019. It is these core assumptions, discounted cash flow analysis applied, which support the 22.5p fair value estimate. Then we have the 'full revenue potential' model. That takes in the possible revenue streams based on products which are still being developed, such as 2EY for powdery mildew or the application of GO-E for use in animal health outside the USA. And they include products not licensed or under evaluation. This is heavily loaded with revenues from ag-chem in 2019, when they leap from £3.23m to £15.94m, and form the bulk of the projected revenues of £24.83m for 2019 (up from £11.16m). In turn, the vast bulk of these 2019 revenues - £13.78m - would be generated by products still under development. These assumptions are set against a background of an underlying costs base of £1m a year, growing at mid-single digits, so operational gearing is such that revenues quickly fall through to the bottom line with only modest deductions. Research and development spend is capitalised and then amortised through the income statement (£700,000 currently), and the broker assumes a continuing prudent approach to R & D which would allow the company to become self-sustaining on a cash basis by 2017. There are trading losses of £21m, taking out the charge for tax for a while, and the broker assumes any short term cash need would be satisfied by debt rather than equity. Free cash flow turns positive in 2017 on the core model, a year earlier on the full revenue potential basis. What else? The encapsulation process has opened up exciting opportunities in non-agricultural fields, such as medicine and dentistry, where the antimicrobial properties of terpenes can be effectively applied at controlled doses for wound healing and oral health applications. Eden is at an advanced stage in developing a series of competitive antimicrobial and invertebrate-control agents suitable for use in vineyards and greenhouse and on a variety of high value field crops. The potential for finding further applications of terpene formulations in agricultural and health care is 'vast and clearly exciting' says the broker. The collaboration and licence agreement with Intellectual Ventures protects existing patents, expands Eden's intellectual property portfolio, and using the strength of IV to provide new deal opportunities. IV has agreed to use its own capital to support Eden's objectives, and the deal should make Eden a more attractive potential partner to work with. The ag-chem market has seen a reasonable level of merger and acquisition activity in recent years, Shore says. Over the next decade, the use of biological solutions is set to record double-digit growth, and by 2030 could represent up to 10% of the global crop protection market. This is positive for Eden's prospects. Listing several deals, Shore points to Bayer's acquisition of Agraquest for Euros 340m (£230m) plus milestone payments in August 2012. Shore thinks Agraquest had revenue of $7m in 2012, so it is probably the most comparable company in the chosen deals to Eden. At 16.25p, Eden is capitalised at £26m. Shore says it could be a potential target in sector consolidation. That is a summary of the broker comments, and they point up the attractions of Eden to investors who may have been hanging on, grimly believing, while a tight financial position has brought risks galore to an otherwise enormously attractive proposition. Few shareholders would want to see Eden taken out by an early bid, given the modest share price in recent years. Medium to longer term, however, that is a clear prospect. The potential applications of terpenes, coupled with the encapsulation process, appear massively wide-ranging. The Shore note fills in some of the gaps, but must remain vague on just what might accrue from which deal. So far, the numbers have been small. But the markets Eden's products could be addressing are massive, and a big money partner could help move things fast. There is little mention in the report of opportunities in America, where the market must be vast. There appears to be general confidence that Eastman will go ahead and exercise the option next spring, pulling in a decent milestone payment, and covering some of the American opportunities. But the lack of comment about America, north and south, is surprising. Could there be big new opportunities there, and in the Far East, where Sumitomo is an obvious player. If anything, the Shore sweep of potential developments looks on the conservative side, which is where it should be. Eden itself remains constrained by a shortage of cash. It is debt free and ought to have cash in the bank after the recent TerpeneTech deal, while Lachlan will bring what will presumably be a modest milestone payment. No-one would, however, welcome a dilutive fund-raising at close to current prices. Hopefully the Shore note and marketing presence will help bring more institutional investors into Eden, perhaps reducing the volatility of the shares. The problem remains the glacial pace of regulatory approvals, despite the obvious environmental benefits of Eden's products. Even now, we are not completely clear of all of the red tape holding 3AEY back in Europe. Though the process ought to be somewhat faster for subsequent products, no-one can be sure of smooth and timely progress. As it has for so long, Eden still looks an excellent growth opportunity. No guarantees, but much of the risk has gone. Go for it. I have a holding in Eden Research.
Eden share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
Your Recent History
Gulf Keyst..
FTSE 100
UK Sterlin..
Stocks you've viewed will appear in this box, letting you easily return to quotes you've seen previously.

Register now to create your own custom streaming stock watchlist.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P:30 V: D:20180222 07:07:52