 Cousin,
No thanks required and (as admitted) some of this stuff I just don't know.
We talked about it a lot on here at the time (of the deal) but without seeing the contract we don't know the detail (which means we won't ever know).
I find it hard to believe that we signed up to a deal where we pay 5.5x the whole company's sales to buy 20%. Isn't that equivalent to paying a 27.5x multiple on the final fraction? (which seems a lot, but maybe it is correct).
Before we entered the news blackout phase and that strange AGM answer, then on top of the Homology work we had notifications of 4 new contracts for early stage AAV in 2022 and 3 more post period in 2023 before they stopped telling us. Then of course there is the one mentioned very recently, but given sales last year from Seb's team I find it tough to imagine that no more AAV work was sold for nearly a year.
Guesstimate figures here, but if process development averages at $3m per customer and takes about a year, then on the 7 process development AAV contracts they told us about (early stage) that's something like $20m worth of work in the building alone there?
5.5x the last 12 months and that would be $110m in this example and yet at the interims OXB had a figure of £20m for the put option at that time. Massively different numbers there unless the multiple is 5.5x 20% of the sales and then it would seem much more comparable. Then there are the figures you quote from Homology which are different again.
There are some big costs at Boston (lease, utilities, investment in equipment, etc.) and it seems we also basically paid off a full shadow board there which won't have been cheap, but regardless of what actually happened (we will never know), I think the point to dwell on is that OXB now have the AAV they wanted (inAAVate) for the much bigger AAV market.
I'm optimistic that inAAVate will do well and that it's simply a matter of time now for process development to work through to the later (more lucrative) stages. Meanwhile we know that TetraVecta (our lentivector) is selling so well that we are at capacity in Oxford and work is being moved to Boston (where I'm sure the money helps a lot - win / win).
Honest opinion here is that I think that is the point to dwell on, rather than trying to make sense of numbers when we don't know the full contract story.
If Homology merging into Q32 counts as a change of owner (and I think it does) then I'd expect OXB to buy out that last 20% early as per their right, but that's just me and it may make more sense to OXB for them to keep hold of the cash now and pay more later.
This theme probably seems a bit rich coming from me, but I wouldn't get too caught up with what Homology do as they wind up their company and exit gene therapy. Very soon (maybe even now) their side of the building will be empty and the cash will be in Q32's books. Whatever we pay for the put option will be split across the CVRs given to Homology's old shareholders and then that's the final nail in the biotech company previously known as Homology.
I think for us the results in 4 weeks is everything.
This time last year we were mid £4 per share.
Under no bad news we were sold down to under £2.
All the good news last year (and there was a lot of good news) made no difference.
On the 29th, OXB have their biggest publicity day of the year (2023 FY results presentation of course) which is really a presentation on 2024 and a peek at 2025 as 2023 is already history.
The wider market isn't expecting breakeven this year on a massively expanded company and record all time sales next year. It will be interesting to see the response.
I mentioned this at the time, but they also gave us 2 months notice of these results when normally it's 2 or 3 weeks. Now that may just be a Frank thing, but it might also be that they want to get something else in first as a springboard.
Hope? Well, yes. But it was a long notice. We have talked about all the possibilities we have guessed at, but it could just as easily be something new too.
I want to make the tsunami analogy here, and I don't think it's hyperbole to say, that the tide went out for us when covid restrictions battered our customers, the AZ vaccine ended a year before the competition and then we lost the Homology work, but the tide is coming back in now and it's going to be an awful lot of work.
We've had 2 pretty awful years but it gets much better from now on. |
Thanks Harry.
Re Serum, the terminology used seemed to have two elements which was what made me wonder when I saw the CEPI capacity reservation and some initial funding being awarded. As ever, there is some definite reading of the tea leaves required which is not always reliable, hence the value of discussion here!
On cash - I spent far too much time digging around when the answer was in plain sight in the 5/3 RNS! On your points re stale/unrevised broker forecasts, the blended forecasts that I can see show 31/12/23 cash still being estimated as £86m gross/£46m net which is what drove me to investigate, given how severe the implied cash burn was to get to that.
Just on Homology, I do have a different interpretation. The Homology financial statements show their equity interest in Solutions, but the supporting notes give some of the gross Solutions information. That's what I've referenced. Just as an aside in readiness for the OXB results, the Solutions loss reported by Homology for 2023 was $167.1m, but that included an impairment of $119.1m (so £134m/£95m if OXB use a similar GAAP basis in their results).
On the put option, does Homology derived revenue count in the 5.5x multiplier? I believed that it did. If so, would OXB swoop later this year when most of the Homology revenue for 2023 has fallen out of the 'last 12 months' reference period? The revenue was $14.6m in H2 23, but I don't see a split of that between Q3 and Q4. |
Part 3.
The Homology situation is very opaque.
The good news (as I believe our house broker noted) is that OXB could take the loss of a customer worth c20m per year in revenue and just eat it / shrug it off and still forecast rough breakeven for the whole company this year. Not many companies our size could do that.
I also think it's important when looking at Homology's figures regarding specific figures of what Solutions is worth in their accounts, to remember they are talking about value of the 20% they own. The full values would have no meaning.
From the interim report - "At 30 June 2023 the put option liability was adjusted to £20.3 million".
So 9 months later who knows.
From the original agreement - "The purchase price payable by Oxford Biomedica US or Oxford Biomedica Solutions on exercise of the Call Option or the Put Option will be equal to the amount Homology would be entitled to receive upon a liquidation of Oxford Biomedica Solutions assuming all of the assets of Oxford Biomedica Solutions’ AAV Manufacturing and Innovation Business are sold for a purchase price based on a valuation equivalent to a multiple of 5.5 times the revenue of Oxford Biomedica Solutions over the twelve months prior to the date of exercise. In addition, the maximum purchase price payable by Oxford Biomedica US or Oxford Biomedica Solutions on exercise of the Call Option or the Put Option will be capped at US$74.1 million (£55.4 million). Additionally, upon a change of control of Homology, Oxford Biomedica US has the right to purchase all (but not less than all) of Homology’s interests in Oxford".
So, there has been a change in the control of Homology - it will soon be part of Q32.
We know what the option was worth at the end of June.
Surely the simplest option here is for OXB to bite the bullet early and make Solutions 100% ours?
If not then there will be lawyers involved as soon as the US lentivector hub starts bringing the money in and Homology's old shareholders start trying to say that it actually counts towards AAV revenue for their CVRs (which it doesn't).
Meanwhile of course it's only weeks since we saw this - "Furthermore, the Company has signed a new agreement with a US-based client specialising in cardiac gene therapy for the tech transfer, optimisation and manufacture of an adeno-associated virus-based process (AAV).".
Last thing we want to do (imho) is wait until we owe Homology's old shareholders a multiple of that when the fees start coming in. |
Part 2.
Stuart said our cash runway (following the end of our biotech business spending) is pretty much infinite.
The cash position at 31 December 2023 was £103.7 million.
From that we owe a $50m loan and the final payment to Homology.
The loan comes with a caveat of a maintained minimum cash balance and I think the Serum cash covers that quite nicely until the loan is repaid at the end of its term and OXB then spend the Serum cash on the final 3 OxBox suites and what goes into them.
OXB shouldn't be spending cash on operations now. Whether they breakeven (or not / or better) for 2024 depends very much on what they spend (say) on capex kitting out Boston as a Homology hub.
They shouldn't need any more cash. |
Cousin,
You cover a lot of points there and some of it I just don't know for sure.
Brief as I can replies here:-
Serum. I believe that is worded the way it is because of what we have now vs what we will have - it's as simple as that. We don't currently have any 2,000 litre bioreactors. One reason for that is almost certainly because we don't have a use for them at present, the other being that our existing production suites are sized for smaller (normal size for CGT) bioreactors.
Some time ago the (unbuilt) 4 suites of the second phase of OxBox became 3 bigger suites and the explanation was bigger to give the option to use 2,000 litre bioreactors if the need arose.
Off at a tangent here, these things are on wheels can can be moved in or out to reconfigure a room or for deep cleaning of the suite or anything similar. We don't currently have a reason to produce vector on that scale for a couple of reasons - 1) is that there is no clinical need for that amount and 2) is that it would be the loss of a fortune if a batch was lost. In the near future (years) there is the possible requirement for such quantities of lentivector for (say) inhalation for CF patients, or liver / peritoneum / peritoneal cavity diseases where the area would be flooded with lentivector to treat, but no need / demand right now.
So no need (for that quantity for our CGT CDMO business) but Serum do have a need. Serum are the world's biggest vaccine company so it's almost certainly for a current unmet need vaccine. The odds are it's Malaria.
Our 3 larger 2,000 litre bioreactor capable suites won't be built for a long time yet and the bioreactors will be long lead time too. What we do have is 3 spare 1,000 litre bioreactors left over from covid vaccine production for AZ and suites in OxBox which they were previously used in. Remember they aren't going to give us any work which they could do in their huge Indian facilities cheaper. WHO rules for malaria vaccine states not all manufactured in one territory.
Long way of explaining there why I think Serum's 10 year deal is for the 1,000 litre which we have now and then the 2,000 litre when completed / available (i.e. I think it's the same deal not 2 different products). |
We know the forecast was for OXB Group revenues of £90m for 2023. They booked £43.1m for H1, so is slightly 2nd half weighted.
Looking at Solutions, the revenues were $30.7m for 2023, and these were slightly 1st half weighted as $16.1m vs $14.6m (£12.9m vs £11.7m).
So, it shows some acceleration ex Homology in 2023 and really underlines the growth they are achieving to overall hit nearly 50% uplift for 2024 whilst losing a client generating nearly 30% of overall revenue in the year before! I guess this may underline some of the analyst scepticism (on top of delivering the cost savings.)
Just on this point, and circulating it back to cash, it looks like Solutions only generated $1m of revenue in 2023 that wasn't the minimum contracted by Homology. That suggests that the call option in March 2025 could be much less than £20m to buy the remaining 20% of Solutions. Obviously we don't know (yet) how revenue is being booked in 2024 in the 'everything everywhere' approach where sites are becoming multi vector rather than vector specific. |
In trying to get a handle on cash I've been looking at the statements made by Homology on their share of OXB Solutions. In the joy of accounting, OXB report the full Solutions result in their Group statements despite being the 80% majority owner.
It's not ideal as Homology report current assets for Solutions and the amount they owe them, so you probably end up with largely cash plus biologistics assets WIP/for sale rather than pure cash. OXB report cash separately.
Cash and cash equivalents for the OXB Group was £141.3m at Dec 22. Solutions had $39.2m of current assets at the same date and $5.2m owed by Homology. So, if that's assumed as cash, it equates to about £27.2m ((39.2-5.2)@1.25 FX). So OXB ex Solutions c.£114.1m.
At June 23, OXB Group cash was £129.4m. Solutions had $15.7m of current assets at the same date and $10.2m owed by Homology. So, if that's assumed as cash, it equates to about £4.4m ((15.7-10.2)@1.25 FX). So OXB ex Solutions c.£125.0m. So cash consumption looks like it was all focused in Solutions.
At the end of Dec 23, Solutions has $10.8m of current assets and $3.1m owed from Homology, so around £6.2m of cash ((10.8-3.1)@1.25 FX) so cash burn appears to have slowed markedly (although we know that Homology ceased development in July, so this may have been helped by receiving minimum revenues for not having to do a great deal in return.)
Obviously, there is a chance that OXB was moving cash around between the parent and Solutions during the year, but I don't get the impression that was happening (and I would hope that it would have been flagged if it was.)
Just on cash, we know that the OXB group cash was £121.4m at end of Aug 23 as that is contained in the going concern statement. It is not clear how much of the $10.2m owed by Homology at end of June to Solutions had been paid by then - Homology say that they aim to pay within 90 days.
Appreciate that this is all very spreadsheet-y, but it does suggest that cash burn at Solutions slowed in the second half of 2023 but analysts expect overall cash burn at the OXB group to be much higher in that period. We know the £10m restructuring costs were due to be incurred, but that's almost compensated by Solutions burning less.
I've also looked at revenues. |
I've also been doing some work on cash to try and get a handle on the runway there.
The £50m funding from Serum was described as requiring a quite specific commitment from OXB in the 2023 half year results:
'Additionally, the Group also had a Capital commitment of £48,935,000 for leasehold improvements in respect of the expansion of its OXBOX manufacturing facility as a result of the £50 million equity investment by Serum Life Sciences in September 2021.'
It had been referenced in passing before, but this was the first time I can see it being formalised in the notes to the financial statements. My assumption is that the amount spent on planning work to date is why it is £1m less than the Serum injection.
So OXB are seeing this as a reserved amount that they shouldn't 'touch' apart from the specified purpose. I guess they are at least earning decent interest on it for now! But it does reduce liquidity headroom if it is respected in the way described. |
I've been doing a bit of digging around to try and get a better handle on some of the OXB moving parts. I'm guessing this may be more directed at Harry given I may have failed to 'log' similar points already made!
In reading some of the reports and transcripts, I am wondering if there are multiple pieces of work going on with Serum.
There has been the much flagged malaria vaccine potential, and OXB have referred to up to 1,000L vaccine manufacturing in the Serum MoU.
But there is also mention of up to 2,000L reservation (with an appropriate fee) in the future OxBox fit out of the fallow area. In looking at these, the CEPI preparation for future pandemics 'Disease X' and '100 day mission' might be a connection here?
The main focus seems to be on having a rapid response and equitable vaccine production globally (so more developing world than developed) but could there be something for OXB here?
'The CEPI Secretariat underwent several increases in the first years of its existence and as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The strategy for 2022-26 requires new capabilities and capacities, including in the areas of Disease X vaccine development, late-stage development, other biologic countermeasures, diagnostics, regulatory science, operations, MANUFACTURING CAPACITY and innovations, and advocacy. As an epidemic preparedness and response organisation, CEPI will continue to retain its nimbleness as it builds the capabilities needed for effective operations, sound investment management, and active engagement with Coalition partners.'
'CEPI and Global Affairs Canada deepen collaboration to strengthen international biosecurity and advance the 100 Days Mission.. . This funding builds on Global Affairs Canada's investment of CAD 100 million announced earlier this year to support CEPI's five-year strategic plan.'
'To prepare for such a scenario, CEPI is investing up to $30 million to build upon SII’s proven track record of rapid response to outbreaks of infectious disease, expanding the company’s existing ability to swiftly supply investigational vaccines in the face of epidemic and pandemic threats.' |
2012: Emily Whitehead is 1st person to be treated and cured using CAR-T (by
2024: 35,000 patients treated with CAR-T + TCR-T.
No better #yeswecan story in our field. |
Today's spot prize for detective work there Phil.
It all adds to the mounting pile of circumstantial evidence that OXB are doing an awful lot better than the market thinks (or is willing to accept at this time). |
linking Frank with Peter (new NED), they have worked together before extensively.
Vetter Pharma, where Peter is CEO is all about Fill and Finish and different packaging formats for end user use. I guess his skill set is to understand how the market needs different end products packaged etc. from our facilities |
A LinkedIn post from Seb from a couple of months back, expanding from 8->14 suites will be substantial capacity improvement I would think.
We are extremely happy to onboard today another 150 colleagues from Lyon and Strasbourg, France as part of the Oxford Biomedica network.
We are excited to announce that we have acquired ABL Europe from Institut Mérieux, a well-established global CDMO. This acquisition increases our Process and Analytical Development capacity and takes our total number of GMP suites to 14 in 7 facilities across the globe. We are delighted to now be able to offer our clients:
Combined >50 years of viral vector process development and manufacturing expertise
A footprint in France for batch release in Europe, UK and USA
Strengthened expertise across Adenovirus, Lentiviruses and AAVs with new capabilities in vaccines, oncolytic viruses and immunotherapy
Increased capacity in process and analytical development and early-stage manufacturing
6 additional EMA approved GMP suites and 1 additional fill finish suite
I have no doubt that this new OXB network has the ability to deliver what our clients expect, Quality, Experience, Availability at the right time and access to expertise! |
Post of the day goes to Tuco. |
reddirish,
OXB are actually in with Microsoft and others already, see
The world is just mad at the moment, but maybe best to wait now - soon you will get the state of play from the horse's mouth. |
Thanks Tuco.
I always try to stress somewhere that it's just an opinion, but of late the circumstantial evidence in favour of OXB seems overwhelming.
Appreciate I'm bringing coals to Newcastle with these points, but:-
What did Institut Merieux see which the market doesn't and why?
We have had the OXB explanation that IM basically wanted to build a mini French OXB before eventually deciding that "if you can't beat them, join them", but even so...
There is some "factor X" here with OXB which we take for granted but IM find compelling. Whether that was discovered through Roch, or Frank or Seb (who are of course French), or by IM's own surveillance, I guess we will never know, but if you look at the deal IM offered exclusively to us, then it's pretty much unprecedented.
They offered us Transgene's old manufacturing plant and labs in Strasbourg, along with the existing orderbook, and also the ABL labs in Lyon, again with their existing order book / workload, for 15m euros worth of shares printed at more than twice the market price at the time of issue (worth 6 million euros?). On top of that they are injecting 10m euro cash into ABL to ease it into exactly what OXB want to use the facilities for without costing OXB anything?
In a nutshell they have seen "factor X" which convinced them to give us something quite valuable for virtually nothing in exchange for becoming part of the OXB family.
Accept that and Institut Merieux who are very old hands in this business can obviously see something which the market doesn't yet see.
What the market does see (and this wasn't public before the IM approach and therefore can't have influenced them) is Seb's sales team selling work at such a pace that (certainly for early stage work) if it wasn't for Boston and the new ABL facilities then we would have to be either giving very long delivery lead times now or just turning work down - which is not normal or reflective of reported market conditions elsewhere.
OK, countering this we seem to have daily news stories now that the London Stock Exchange is finished, but regardless of how true that eventually turns out to be, you wouldn't expect it to undervalue a particular company because of where it is listed - especially as we have shares sold OTC on other exchanges - like OXB.DF in the US (and also have very supportive US analysts like Joe at HCW).
Time and time again I come back to the same point which is this combination of OXB being seen as a pandemic vaccine stock / being under the radar as a smallcap / being too difficult to understand / having evolved or reinvented itself too many times. When you couple all that with the fact that they will soon announce a very big loss for last year in the same presentation which they will forecast breakeven (hopefully better) for this year, then you can sort of understand the very sceptical approach from the likes of Numis, which is of course "OK, but we'll wait and see thanks".
9 covering brokers on OXB's website. I think I'm correct in saying that only one has revised based upon recent events, with the rest waiting for the FY results presentation before crunching the numbers and revisiting.
If that presentation achieves what we hope then all the analysts should up their targets so that the consensus moves much closer to RBC's figure, because at the moment that 180p target from the low analyst and 5 of the covering 9 rating OXB only as "hold" is doing us no favours at all. |
According to an article in last week's Economist, investors transferred over $31b in equity funding into health-care related AI stocks between 2019 and 2022. That number can only have grown massively in the past year as the AI bubble has inflated further. Is this a possible explanation for the dearth of buyers in the biotech area over the same timescale? Portfolio managers will have kept their allocations to 'health' fairly constant, but moved from one subsector into the newly exciting one. The flows will reverse once the drug development firms - which are the users of the new AI tools - begin to accelerate successful projects, and as the AI bubble deflates. When might that be? I'd give it two more years. |
Harry,
that post above encapsulates the situation succinctly and elegantly . Like you I am biased as a very long term shareholder , but on a risk-reward basis , at the current share price , I have seen little else that looks this compelling in over twenty years .
Tuco. |
I'm not sure how much money in the market is (even loosely) anchored to fundamental value these days.
The most likely attraction for adding new investors is a rapidly rising share price... |
As brief as I ever can be here, I honestly think that OXB is one of those shares which is too difficult for most laypeople to get their heads around.
So, if you are a steelmaker or a goldminer or a telecoms company or a clothes retailer, then the market can compartmentalise you very quickly, there will be lots of analysts who understand your business really well, the investors can associate your business with what you do, and it goes on.
As our current CEO says (remember, this is a 60+ year old very successful CDMO exec), he wasn't really aware of OXB until the pandemic. If that's true of an industry insider, then what OXB did (did very well, but that's sort of irrelevant) was so niche that very few people had even heard of them, let alone understood their business - until the pandemic, which even then actually gave them a "name" for doing something else other than their speciality.
Up until May 2013 OXB is a biotech company. Primarily gene delivery. Very difficult to value a portfolio of research and trial drugs for such a specialised area.
May 2013 until the end of 2023, OXB is this almost unique hybrid company which was biotech drug development for our own drugs + service provider for the likes of Orchard, Novartis, BMS, etc., which totalled 25 as of the interims last year. Really difficult to find another company like that to compare to (biotech research / drug discovery in gene delivery for themselves + CDMO service provider for 25+ others).
In less words, there are many CDMOs to compare to and a huge number of biotech companies, but if anyone can find a gene delivery biotech company which is also a CDMO then I'll give them today's spot prize. So what do they compare to?
From the end of 2023 onwards OXB is no longer biotech and has stopped the development spend on its own in house drugs, so is now a pure play CDMO which should be much easier for the market to understand.
The trouble with the last point here is that the other CDMOs we can all name (Lonza, TF, Samsung, Catalent, Charles River, etc.) all have wide portfolios. By that I mean they make biologics, small molecule, tablets, anything which they can make money producing, and usually tagged onto the end of that business is a CGT (cell and gene therapy division) which does viral vectors and such (like OXB).
OXB is a pure play CGT CDMO, which as some of you will remember from a recent webcast, Seb seemed to imply is only us. So yet again, albeit unintentionally, OXB might have ended up in a position where the market is looking for something to compare against and struggling.
I think this is our major issue - under the radar and too difficult to understand.
The pure play CGT will either be a blessing or a curse. If it works out well then the gearing will be amazing as our whole business is tied to a market which is predicted to explode and OXB themselves say they see 1,600+ potential customers.
Should that market prediction go the way of the nuclear powered vacuum cleaner then obviously it wouldn't be as good, but what is the likelihood? On just one drug we provide an essential vector for, over 6,000 people have already received the cancer treatment for a disease stage which was previously untreatable. That market is here now.
In the past I've mentioned many times a rough / rule of thumb sector average for CDMO of 5.5x sales as a company valuation. It's not perfect, just a ballpark, but on the "low end" £126m forecast for this year, OXB should be around £700m or 70p per share. On the high end of the forecast £134m would be as near as doesn't matter to RBC's mid 12 month target of 740p. I heard the other day that someone had now put out 770p, but I don't know who that is.
This year the analysts have to start valuing us as a CDMO. The new problem (for the analysts) as I mention above, is that the sector average covers companies making everything from over the counter drugs costing a few pounds to million dollar personalised treatments. It's an average, but CGT should be weighted higher.
As it stands today, with a £200m market cap OXB is trading on 1.5x this year's forecast sales. There's obviously something very wrong with the rating there.
Personally I think OXB eventually ends up much more than the sector average, simply because of the speciality (and forecast need) of what they do very well.
For the moment though, we remain under the radar, ill understood outside of our industry / customers, and still labelled as a pandemic stock (post pandemic).
I'm hopeful that 4 weeks on Monday OXB kill that perception.
It will be the first time Stuart talks about 2025.
They will stress that the drug discovery business ended with the 2023 loss.
The coverage of the results will be of a CDMO company with a good forecast for 2024.
So, the argument against any biotech is always "jam tomorrow" (good results at the end of the next / current trial). OXB are not a biotech company any more.
They are a pure play CGT CDMO and will give forecasts for this year and next. Next being record revenue which will beat the pandemic vaccine revenues which were quoted by everyone as being exceptional.
I can't see them paying a dividend until the loan is repaid and the last 20% in Boston is ours. At that point then I guess it's on the cards, but if you look at Lonza then it's not a big dividend. If OXB pull in the numbers which they are projecting (over £300m by 2027) and if the multiple placed on OXB by the market reflects them being pure CGT in that market, then I don't think anyone sat on those shares would mind the lack of dividend. |
If you looked back to the financial pages in the past you would see most stocks with P/E ratios and dividends Today there are so many stocks with little chance of a dividendI think there is a return to that earlier norm and timesAs I have said before OXB needs a prospect of divi to attract todays investors |
I disagree to the extent that I think the upside is likely to be distinctly near term - e.g. within 6 - 12 months as the published metrics unfold to justify a sensible price. On the other hand I don't think the upside will be as large as the more optimistic projections suggest due to the general market malaise in the sector.
If share price momentum should take it briefly into anything approaching euphoric (or even optimistic) territory it will almost certainly subside quite sharply - again!
Also allow that many who have hung on from higher levels may be pleased to get out at their break-even point. |
We are in danger of over-complicating our thinking here, across the board biotech has been in a longer term unloved cycle and is a serial under performer against the tech market - for all the reasons we know. Any biotech investment is starting with one hand tied behind the back until rates come down again and all the other reasons that the sector is so unloved start to resolve.
And I do own here for all the reaons that excite Harry, but let's be very realistic on the near term upside...dyor and no advice etc |
“It's apples and oranges isn't it?”….indeed and lemons..
Very different animals Redx and OXB yes and i can only hope that today’s enfeebled Uk stockmarkets will be suitably discerning but that’s not immediately evident. |
Customisable watchlists with full streaming quotes from leading exchanges, such as LSE, NASDAQ, NYSE, AMEX, Bovespa, BIT and more.
Hot Features
Premium
