We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oxford Biomedica Plc | LSE:OXB | London | Ordinary Share | GB00BDFBVT43 | ORD 50P |
| Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 28.00 | 9.33% | 328.00 | 1,285,192 | 16:35:22 |
| Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 325.50 | 330.00 | 350.00 | 303.00 | 304.00 | |
| Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medicinal Chems,botanicl Pds | 139.99M | -45.16M | -0.4676 | -6.95 | 313.89M |
| Last Trade Time | Trade Type | Trade Size | Trade Price | Currency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16:41:04 | O | 72,039 | 324.84 | GBX |
| Date | Time | Source | Headline |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01/5/2024 | 07:00 | UK RNS | Oxford Biomedica PLC Total Voting Rights |
| 30/4/2024 | 17:00 | UK RNS | Oxford Biomedica PLC 2023 Annual Report and Accounts |
| 29/4/2024 | 09:38 | UK RNS | Oxford Biomedica PLC Prelim Results for Y/E 2023 - REPLACEMENT |
| 29/4/2024 | 07:00 | UK RNS | Oxford Biomedica PLC Preliminary results for the year ended 31 Dec 2023 |
| 02/4/2024 | 07:00 | UK RNS | Oxford Biomedica PLC Total Voting Rights |
| 20/3/2024 | 16:18 | ALNC |  EARNINGS AND TRADING: Roadside Real Estate trims Cambridge Sleep stake |
| 20/3/2024 | 07:00 | UK RNS | Oxford Biomedica PLC Update on CDMO Services |
| 11/3/2024 | 07:00 | UK RNS | Oxford Biomedica PLC Board Changes |
| 05/3/2024 | 17:09 | ALNC | EARNINGS AND TRADING: Harland & Wolff wins major Falklands contract |
| 05/3/2024 | 12:00 | UKREG | Update to Medium-Term Financial Guidance and 2023 Trading and Notice of.. |
Oxford Biomedica (OXB) Share Charts1 Year Oxford Biomedica Chart |
|
1 Month Oxford Biomedica Chart |
Intraday Oxford Biomedica Chart |
| Date | Time | Title | Posts |
|---|---|---|---|
| 03/5/2024 | 14:34 | OXB. One owner, FSH Excellent conditionwith ejector seat | 7,773 |
| 13/3/2024 | 11:08 | Where we going | 945 |
| 13/2/2024 | 12:39 | Oxford Biomedica | 2,118 |
| 14/9/2023 | 10:29 | Open-minded posters thread | 576 |
| 26/4/2023 | 15:56 | OXB - sense and sensibility | 479 |
| Trade Time | Trade Price | Trade Size | Trade Value | Trade Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-05-03 15:58:03 | 324.84 | 72,039 | 234,011.49 | O |
| 2024-05-03 15:58:03 | 324.84 | 72,039 | 234,010.05 | O |
| 2024-05-03 15:41:05 | 324.84 | 72,039 | 234,010.05 | O |
| 2024-05-03 15:35:22 | 328.00 | 49,595 | 162,671.60 | UT |
| 2024-05-03 15:29:29 | 325.00 | 945 | 3,071.25 | AT |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 03/5/2024 09:20 by Oxford Biomedica Daily Update Oxford Biomedica Plc is listed in the Medicinal Chems,botanicl Pds sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker OXB. The last closing price for Oxford Biomedica was 300p.Oxford Biomedica currently has 96,580,639 shares in issue. The market capitalisation of Oxford Biomedica is £313,887,077. Oxford Biomedica has a price to earnings ratio (PE ratio) of -6.95. This morning OXB shares opened at 304p |
Posted at 01/5/2024 11:51 by harry s truman I've seen similar many times with OXB (and other companies) before and it reminds me of the old adage about the transfer of money from the impatient to the patient.I'm easy about it and if people who bought in for the results are now taking a few quid out, well nobody ever made a loss taking a profit did they? Even if it is a small profit taken early vs what is on the table long term. I mentioned the other day about Novartis (obviously a fantastic long term partner for us) and with each announcement it was 2 steps forward and 1 back until it sunk in with the people who matter that a commercial supply deal for them was worth a lot of money to OXB for a long time. You can see those Novartis dates in the long term chart and how the climb lags. Unfortunately covid and the world going mad knocked us down from the Novartis gains, then built us up with the AZ deal and then knocked us down again. To dive back into my lucky dip of useful sayings, some days you're the pigeon, other days the statue. Back to where we are and the words of the great philosopher Paul Tuttle Snr., "that was is what was but this is is what is now". I'd hoped for better press coverage than what we got following the results. That may still be coming, but if it doesn't come soon then OXB need to make some news themselves. I'm actually quite confident that they can do that and of course there were mentions / hints in the webcast. They listed 2 commercial supply partners, before explaining that it isn't really 2 just yet, it's Novartis + 1 undisclosed preparing for commercial production. Just who that refers to (we have had many guesses here) doesn't really matter, but I do remember from Novartis and their submission for review, a really important part of the submission (nearly as important as the actual trial data) is proving that if you are granted a licence for a medicine then you can show that you have in place a proven capability to supply drug material immediately to meet the treated need (of that granted licence). This is what OXB will be doing right now. So whichever regulator it is (MHRA / EMA / FDA) will either be auditing whichever OXB facility have prepared for this work or studying a presentation by OXB's in house QA/QC/Validation people submitted to cover the same thing. So when the final data for our partner's drug goes before the regulator review committee (soon) part of that submission will be a guarantee of what amount OXB can supply by when and the standards it will meet. It may even have happened and they are simply waiting for the announcement. Regardless of the if / but / when / where vagaries of that statement, very soon OXB have 2 commercial supply bankers where instead of one off batches for trial supply, they will produce batches continually to meet demand for the life of the drug. It's a big thing for OXB (and us). On top of this we have Stuart admitting that they are talking about / looking at a couple of things outside of what we would normally do - and surely one of those has to be the long held presumption here of the malaria vaccine for Serum. My only caution there (assuming our collective guesses are close) is that WHO > UNICEF > GAVI > Serum > OXB in a long line provides massive possibilities for that taking a lot longer than it needs to - but you never know. An announcement about that would be game changing news for us, but to repeat something I've mentioned before - the only time I've ever seen these huge organisations rush something through was during covid. |
Posted at 29/4/2024 22:03 by harry s truman Parting shot for results day. The slides are here The webcast usually takes a few days to get put on the OXB website, so for anybody who didn't get a chance to see it today I have a few notes which I thought interesting:- I've already mentioned Sardocor (whose logo you can see on slide 13) and who seem very likely to be the undisclosed cardio partner mentioned in the last OXB CDMO update. Other things - please note this is from my memory based upon some headings I jotted down - and just the order I remember them here:- The LentiVector transition to the USA has gone very well. They are already taking work from Oxford and are ready for new customers now and at bigger scale later in the year. They mention Frank's "One OXB" (which I think was previously "everything everywhere" so they must have decided on a better name) where every site will do every vector, and that it's a big thing for our customers to have their investment close by and (in particular with the Americans) closer to their time(zone). They wanted to stress that the 5 late stage / commercial programmes (3 in phase 3 trials and 2 commercial (Novartis production + 1 preparing for commercial) does not include anything which might be approved from phase 2 BLA. So the late stage genuinely means going from phase 3 the traditional route, whilst the phase 2 BLA route would be grouped with the other 46 programmes. In less words the number in late stage is/could be better than it looks. They mention about Homology and explain that the deal was done on 4 pillars - the location & equipment / the people with the knowhow / the vector IP / the Homology work. They said that they wanted the first 3 but the 4th was the deal and that it was always going to be binary. We lost that and there is the impairment charge. As it worked out, by 2023 41% of our work was AAV (from nothing in Jan 2022) and that 41% of the work only came because of the Homology deal. It's now growing, but is mostly earlier stage than the LentiVector work and so it will be a time gap before we have a mix which is the different vectors but same spread of trial stages. I think it was Seb who said that 2022 to 2024 so far is a doubling of the pipeline - and of course the year is far from finished. Stuart talked about starting the year with £100+m gross cash and said that the capex we needed to do is mostly done now and that he can control spend until we need to do the last phase of OxBox which I think he said was 28/29. In other words he has no need to raise more in the near / medium term. One of the analysts asked him what OXB's capacity was without expansion (how much money is full capacity) and Stuart wouldn't answer but then said between 2x and 3x current would be the number, before adding that nobody ever really wants to be full because if someone puts in an enquiry and your reply is that you can fit them in 18 months down the road then they look elsewhere. If I understand correctly then France has a year end in February and they have already closed with a small loss which IM are covering (so that costs us nothing). They explain that OXB will broadly breakeven this year, but what is being spent in France makes that a small loss for the group, even though we are not paying it. The RBC analyst asked if the big announcement last month was included in figures which OXB have chopped at the end of March and it isn't. The JPM analyst asked an interesting question, which was "will H2 on its own be profitmaking" and the Sir Humphrey style reply seemed to be yes. This then morphed into a question of "could this year be profitmaking?" and Stuart replied with words something like "we are working on a couple of things which are outside of the normal scope for our traditional work and if those come in then they would be on top of / above guidance". The only thought which popped into my mind there was that a malaria vaccine for Serum is not CGT CDMO and so would fit those words very well. Stuart wanted to stress that he was vary confident of the current guidance. I think his words were that '24 and the majority of '25 is there now. Adding that they also have a few interesting things which are not baked into current guidance. The guy from Stiefel wanted to know if the 2024 growth so far is really just because of what ABL added or if it's organic. Stuart said both and it's proportional. Numis asked if post-Homology we had lost important people in Boston and the reply was no and that we had kept almost everyone we hoped to keep - adding that OXB group has a very low turnover of staff (who see what OXB is about and want to stay part of it). Killer question for me came from Miles at Peel Hunt, who asked about the sanctions on WuXi that the US are going to vote on at some point. Basically who will do the work if US companies can't send it there. Seb (I think) answered with - "Has anyone asked to transfer work from them to us? No. Has anyone made enquires? Yes.". Interesting one that isn't it? Remember - this is from memory of the webcast only so bear that in mind. |
Posted at 26/4/2024 00:15 by harry s truman Pleased you sorted it out and hopefully it's of some use.Regarding the results on Monday and more importantly the reaction to them, then I'm hopeful that they will wake a lot of people up (not just the analysts of the covering brokers). If you go back a year then we had just one broker rating OXB as a hold. After the interims it was 5 rating OXB as a hold. It's only just gone back to 4 with Stifel recently taking OXB off the naughty step, but the big show at the interims plainly put a lot of the analysts in "we'll wait and see" mode. Can't really blame them. New CEO says £41m loss in '22, bigger loss in '23, but it ends at that and we save £30m per year from now on and by 2026 we will have at least doubled '23 revenue and be earning better than 20% EBITDA on that. It's a bold claim isn't it? You all know I'm sold on the message, but even I admit that's quite a turnaround. Reassuringly, they have said a couple of times since that they are on track and hitting the targets. RBC seem convinced and are nudging ever closer to £8 with their 12 month target. Stifel are coming around to the idea but have a target of less than half that. It's up to OXB now to convince the doubters on Monday. I've convinced myself that Stuart has told us (without saying as much) that OXB's fixed costs for the business (UK, Boston, France, everything) is somewhere a little over £130m. I base that guess on bits from many releases and presentations, but I also think the "broadly breakeven" on £126m to £134m means that the actual cost is somewhere in that £8m spread where £126m is a small loss and £134m may even be a tiny profit. The tantalising prospect here (if that guess is correct) is that anything Stuart hasn't put into that forecast (because he can't do "we're talking to and we might get" as a forecast) will change this year radically. OXB have already told us that they will no longer put legacy milestone payments into their forecasts - but we do still have a lot of legacy contracts of the royalty and milestone type. If one of those drops a milestone payment on a trial stage or an approval, then that's a big thing in a year which at the moment is "broadly breakeven". Seb seems to be able to sell sand to the Arabs, but something late trial stage or commercial supply is worth a lot of money to us. Same goes for our regular guessing game about Serum and such. If we hear about one of those on Monday and suddenly it looks like we could be profitable again this year, then nobody in the market at the moment (including RBC) is forecasting that. If what OXB suggested in that webcast is true (that we are the only pure CGT viral vector CDMO, with all the other major players simply doing CGT as just a small division of a much bigger business) then what happens if the predictions regarding the market size (see quote below) come true? Everyone else is going to see their CGT business unit stretched to capacity whilst OXB is going to see the whole company stretched to capacity. The gearing at that point would be phenomenal for OXB's revenue / earnings. (quote) Market Overview of Global CGT CDMO market: According to our latest research, the global CGT CDMO market looks promising in the next 5 years. As of 2022, the global CGT CDMO market was estimated at USD 4129.71 million, and it’s anticipated to reach USD 20489.61 million in 2028, with a CAGR of 30.6% during the forecast years. A contract development and manufacturing company (CDMO) is a company within the pharmaceutical industry that provides drug development and manufacturing services. Pharmaceutical companies partner with CDMOs as a way to outsource drug development and drug manufacturing. Cell and gene therapy (CGT) involves living cells, tissues, viral vectors and non-viral gene modification components. Its R&D technology and production process are more difficult than those of traditional biological drugs. CGT CDMO, as the upstream of CGT pharmaceutical companies, can help cell therapy companies overcome many difficulties in R&D and production while reducing costs, to improve R&D efficiency and enhance the commercialization success rate. (unquote) |
Posted at 22/4/2024 11:14 by harry s truman Brucie,I am open to persuasion (honestly) just tell me the bad news lurking here. Had OXB not been fortunate enough to go into the post-covid economy with a massive cash pile then it could have been very bad. We all know the story - sector wide the work went away and the cost of everything went up - including loan interest. No company can see its regular trade decimated by halts and restriction as costs rise and not be hit by it. I haven't studied Homology in depth, but I would be surprised if the covid / post covid effects weren't the straw which eventually broke their business - and of course lost us a major customer. So yes we know that, but where is the OXB specific bad news in having a LV with 3x the industry yield and an AAV with 10x. Lots of safety data to reassure prospective customers that not only can we produce what we promise, but we can show patient safety years too. A week today is our closure on a terrible time when the world went mad and was led by sheep, but that's the end of it. Somewhere north of £50m will have gone up in smoke during 2023, but it ends at that. Very fortunately we had it to burn. We know there have been some big sellers (especially in US funds) but that's not because they know something bad about OXB, it's because they either needed the money or couldn't hold anymore as OXB went below a certain market cap or got booted from an index. If there was any bad news here - even mud which didn't really carry much credence - then badger's thread of truth would be very busy. OXB's prospects look brighter than I can ever remember - and I go back a long way, but I'm not going celebrate anything until we are back above last year's share price high - which was for a much smaller company which wasn't as profitable. A more than 50% discount on that price is insane. |
Posted at 20/4/2024 11:57 by harry s truman Plutonian,I wouldn't put too much sway on what the market thinks. Aside from a very few with an interest in the bio sector (like us on this thread) most had never heard of OXB until Boris saw vaccines as a way out of a very bad corner he had backed himself into. Consequently we are much more well known these days, but with the perception of a covid vaccine stock in a post covid era. It's something I'm conflicted about, because whilst the post covid reaction has been a real kicking for OXB shareholders - the money we took in making the vaccine for AZ has carried us through a very bad period when almost everything else we would normally have been doing was halted by the reactions to covid. As it stands, the AZ money got us through covid, but there have been casualties - like our in-house drug pipeline. But if we are honest about it, what had that achieved in the last 10 years besides putting Sio/Axovant out of business? I guess it all comes under the heading of "you win some, you lose some" and life isn't fair or perfect. You know from long experience that my glass is half full, but I've just watched another 6 months of OXB apparently doing very well whilst not really telling us any detail. Yes they have kept that promise to keep us more informed with numbers - and they have done this with sales figures and updating forecasts, but if there have been any names then I can't recall them - which of course leads to our Cluedo theories on here. OXB will update the pipeline on the 29th, and I'm expecting 30 programmes from a year ago, which became 41 programmes 6 months ago, to be at least 50 programmes. If not then how did Oxford end up at capacity? I'm pretty relaxed about calling that one. They seem to be bringing in new work at an astonishing rate - but perhaps that is explained by the fact that (as far as I know) they have never let anybody down - so if you were XYZ Inc and were pinning everything on a new trial drug hope, then who would you put it with? OXB have a great industry reputation for delivering what they promise to do. So I think they are awash with early stage work - some of which will progress to late stage work in time - but if they can win some late stage work of some description too (as per the recent RNS), then that's a huge bonus. My guess for the results is 50+ client programmes. I think they will name some new names from that in a big reveal (as per the precedent set in the interims presentation) but that the rest will remain confidential. I think Stuart's £126 million to £134 million revenue will likely be revised up a little more, and if it's the top number at the end of the year then we breakeven and if it's the lower number then maybe a small loss (remembering that whilst IM are paying for ABL to be updated for our process development work, we are paying for that in Boston - which is obviously a cost). As for what else then there are too many unknowns for us to guess. Of the knowns where there are clues:- We know OXB can call the 20% option early if Homology changes ownership. Will that now happen this year instead of next? Our deal with the worlds biggest vaccine company who likely needs a malaria partner. The contract left open with AZ - for what? They seemed pretty clear that they had seen enough of covid and politicians. The results a year ago where they told us they were expecting to hear something from BMS. The fact that they named a client told me that was something significant as OXB will be expecting to hear from partners about something all the time. Is that still live or has it gone away? Maybe it happened and OXB have just said nothing. They told us at the interims that we are making T-Charge vector for Novartis. That was something which was top secret in 2021, and of course it continues to move steadily forwards until it's either a lot of supply work for us or it fails in trials. There was what we have mentioned with Arcellx for the treatment of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Juno (BMS of course) had adopted our Process C perfusion bioreactor tech for one of their Phase 1 trials. If that works out then of course they will move everything to the best in class system (and everybody else will follow the huge name). Cabaletta are one of our named partners and we know that they have had various permissions granted during the last six months to begin their trials (their news posted on here). Beam had dosed their first patient with BEAM-201. Remember readout is usually pretty quick with CAR-T. Two new adenoviral vector agreements with Oxford University had been signed, including a Clinical Supply Agreement for the manufacture and supply of adenoviral vectors for a vaccine against the Lassa virus, and a second agreement for the supply of adenoviral vector for their programme in Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) signed post-period. So an update on this maybe too? Will someone else have taken LentiStable besides Orchard? You thought Rocket might be a possibility and that seemed to fit very well in my view too. An awful lot going on here I think. Plus of course what is going to come in through ABL. |
Posted at 19/4/2024 18:33 by harry s truman Well, whatever the economic climate, pending world wars and our various theories on the "up a bit" / "down a bit" of the the OXB share price, a week today the run-up to the results is over and a week on Monday we turn a new page in the chronicles of OXB.When they announced the date of the results, I noted the near 2 month notice of them (normally only weeks) and wondered if that was to allow them time to get something else in first. If there was anything to that idea then they have 5 days to spring something on us. One point which occurred to me recently was that until Frank, results days were just that (the results) and some of those historic presentations were very quick. I can't remember one where they took the opportunity to announce something other than results on the same day. Frank changed that last September when the interims also launched project Aquarius (the purchase of ABL Europe) and named some new partners who had been under the radar until then. So, still possibilities for this week coming and certainly the prospect of an excellent FY presentation with some nice bonuses on top of what we have already seen guided. |
Posted at 07/4/2024 13:10 by cousinit 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. |
Posted at 04/4/2024 13:32 by harry s truman 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. |
Posted at 04/4/2024 11:09 by harry s truman 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. |
Posted at 18/3/2024 11:57 by harry s truman 5.5x sales isn't a model Brucie, it's just a historic sector average of what a CDMO company should trade on - so a very rough guide. There is a progressively more accurate way to gauge, involving EV and such, but when OXB's value is so low, does that even matter? No, it's just a comparison.In a similar way using a sector average for CDMO is only very approximate as a lot of people in CDMO are making generic otc medicines which there is only money in on huge volumes. CGT is far more lucrative and so the rating can (with some justification be double the average) - but you don't see me do that do you?. It's like the breakeven figure for OXB, or the amount they need to sell to cover their costs, and OXB have told you previously everything you need to know to have a good stab at working that out. You know that c£90m last year wasn't enough, but you can't look at the loss because some of that was for other stuff besides operations (capex on expansion in the US, £10m on redundancies and such), but you can remember that OXB said that on 130% of c£90m OXB would be broadly breakeven this year. Since then the ball has rolled on, but ABL was said to be neutral in its pre-OXB life and our growth is now up another 5%. In the simplest terms though, last September OXB told you that c£117m (c£90m x 1.3) would be broadly breakeven this year and a fortnight ago they told you that this year is now projected to be a FY2024 revenue range of £126 million to £134 million. They really have showered us with detailed news of late, which is there for anyone who wants to look. Yes there will be costs to bring ABL into the OXB family, but IM are paying those - and are apparently very happy to do so. If, (if, if, if) the margin on c£117m in sales covers OXB's wage bill, leases, interest payments, utility charges and everything else this year, then what they sell above that is basically margin to the bottom line less raw material costs, consumables, packing, logistics and such - isn't it? But what I have written there isn't new or news - we have known an evolving story since September that they are selling an unprecedented amount of work. At each update that has got better. I might have to wait until after the interims and I might not, but personally I'm convinced that barring some exceptional negative event, OXB will be back in the FTSE250 this year. I think though that we've all set our stalls out now though, and that nothing we type here changes anything anyway - so perhaps the best policy is to wait for news now, whether that be on the 29th of April or before. |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
