Premaitha Share Discussion Threads

[hjb1] 05/11/2017 16:04

DJ, listen will ya! he said it at the AGM ffs! nowt to do with the RNS, gettit!!?? lol.We ALL already know b/e by year end has been mentioned but he said at the AGM that he had tasked the workforce to make it end of Dec, gettit??
Just passing on what was said at the AGM!

[twix386] 05/11/2017 13:28

They are also striving to reduce cash burn.So, your typical burn rate is top end/too high.Perhaps just a little too eager to paint the darkest picture!I suspect if funding required it will be early new year and possibly not, so long as court verdict plays ball.

[dj trading] 05/11/2017 12:06

Hjb - Reynolds words per the RNS were
"a sharp focus on achieving profitability"
I'm sorry but that doesn't imply break even just that they are striving for it!

[hjb1] 05/11/2017 11:07

DJ, don't get me wrong, I agree they will need funds fairly soon, just depends on the method now I suppose.The b/e by end of Dec was mentioned by Reynolds at the AGM so can't be far off.

[dj trading] 05/11/2017 10:57

"hjb15 Nov '17 - 10:34 - 4936 of 4937 0 0
Why would they have a problem with legal fees when they have put £5/6m aside and they say they have enough to cover costs?"

The legal fee provision has been put through P&L but they now need the cash to pay the outstanding bills as I have tried to explain above. I think that will have all gone by now/Xmas based on historic burn and legal costs (cash not P&L as provided for) for work done in 1H - we shall soon see

[dj trading] 05/11/2017 10:53

hjb- "a sharp focus on achieving profitability" is pretty meaningless statement and applies to every business currently loss making I assume!

As you know I look at numbers and the historic financial performance coupled with the bulk of the litigation costs (£3.3m remained provided for in P&L but not in cash reserve at YE)

Revenue and cashburn £m/6month for past 2 years

.......1H16 2H16 1H17 2H17
Revenue 0.6 1.8 1.45 1.6
Cashburn 4.4 3.8 3.7 4.2

Year end cash 31/3/17 was £1.3m and since then they have extended TF loan by $4-5m
So assuming burn rate still running at around £4m/6month they will be looking for a further loan/funds before Xmas
dyor"

And "the cash burn for 16/17 included £2.1m relating to litigation (see movement in provision)
At year end the provision stood at £3.3m and all within current liabilities so they expect all of this will be expended in 2017/18FY with I assume the bulk in 1H as court case was in July.
Whilst this has been provided for through the P&L there isn't a cash reserve so cash burn in 1H likely to be higher than the typical run rate - offset by increased Revenue/GP."

TF loan now £12m repayable in 2013 (edit 2023) with interest now running at £0.7m/annum
And of course TF have security over Premaitha's assets see Charges here:-

[hjb1] 05/11/2017 10:34

if so, then they won't be at b/e by end of Dec like Reynolds has asked his team to achieve.Why would they have a problem with legal fees when they have put £5/6m aside and they say they have enough to cover costs?

[dj trading] 05/11/2017 10:00

Re - Options in lieu of cash bonuses
Can be read two ways imo - a good incentive scheme or a cash preservation scheme
My view - the hat needs to passed around again and soon - TF or new Investors?

imo dyor

[small crow] 04/11/2017 08:04

gnmartin, thanks for that - pity the civil servant couldn't answer me (actually, in my first communications with the office I had to point out that their website had published the wrong email address, so attention to detail not impressive...

[twix386] 04/11/2017 00:22

As I'd hoped. We seem to be with a gradually rising trend as we approach verdict.

[gnnmartin] 03/11/2017 22:33

I attended the AGM and asked whether the court hearing had been open to the public. It had for the most part, though there were times when the public and some of the litigants were required to leave.

[the monkster] 03/11/2017 13:31

the low teens ?? I think we'll be lucky !!!! Somebody dreaming again....

[andysand] 03/11/2017 12:38

The case won't be listed as it has already happened no? If so, then we are just waiting on the ruling.

[twix386] 03/11/2017 06:10

In the Low teens will be a result after this last 6 months to 2 damn years! Something to build on.Indeed, I don't expect a binary result but I do expect us to come out ahead and would be very disappointed after all the bod rhetoric (that's been downplayed of late) if we didn't get the better of the verdict. After all, forgetting every other aspect, we have stated we do not infringe. If so, we should have this upheld in the verdict and win!!! Nothing else then matters even if illumina's patents were ruled valid etc etc

[timojelly] 03/11/2017 05:25

Either way as I think you have said Twix, this could have a ' non-binary' outcome. I tend to agree, with past experience. I expect a 'woolly' outcome that leads to appeal and a meandering share price for another year in the low teens.

[twix386] 03/11/2017 04:58

Of course, a pretty good idea it's likely around mid Nov or before, but always at judges discretion.I think next week or certainly by following week fwiw

[hjb1] 02/11/2017 11:06

when the judge is good and ready we will all know! pointless speculating, even Prem only say by year end so could be 31st Dec yet.

[gooosed] 02/11/2017 11:04

I may very well have gotten that wrong re being a closed hearing. Agree - a public servant withholding info of a public nature is a bit off. The beaks finding should be with us in a matter of days so as you say not really that important.

[small crow] 02/11/2017 10:55

It appeared in the diary when it was ongoing. Then things seem to drop off the end when the hearing is finished and the diary is updated. As far as I know, there has been no confirmation that it was a closed hearing: when I wrote to the administrator she told me that hearings were not, generally, closed. Then, when I asked her if that particular hearing had been closed she didn't reply which, since she is a public servant, I thought was a bit off, but I left it there. In the long run, it doesn't matter. I can't find any equivalent document telling us about later stages of progress but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist somewhere in the HMG website!

[gooosed] 02/11/2017 10:39

small crow - interesting, thanks for link. Perhaps as it was a closed hearing no such announcement will be made. A bit strange really as Financial Press etc. would be wanting to cover the judgement . . . . .

[small crow] 02/11/2017 09:01

goosed

It's not in the Court Diary so not sure where else to look:

[gooosed] 02/11/2017 08:51

I presume there is a public notification of the date for the Judges ruling ?

[fse] 01/11/2017 17:03

Thanks Hj for the update.