David Global
22 Oct 2017
Re: Bloomberg Article Thurs 19th Oct Sally, yes1. Most Chinese Biotechs, HCM, BGNE etc went up significantly because the Chinese Federal Drug Administration released 2 pieces of news a) Reduced time for the approval of new drugs b) Tehy will now start accepting clinicial trail data from outside China, meaning that it will be much quicker to get drugs approved2. The Chnese Govt re-stated last month that Biotech is one of their top 10 industries for growth
videodawn
22 Oct 2017
Re: IHT exempt on AIM? The LSE gives this as a benefit of AIM....Business property relief (BPR)BPR can be an extremely valuable relief for individuals who invest in qualifying AIM companies.The main benefit of BPR, where it is available, is that it provides up to 100 per cent exemption from IHT in respect of “transfers of value”. The most common transfer of value involving shares arises following the death of a shareholder either where the shares form part of the death estate or were transferred by way of a lifetime gift within the previous seven years.The full 100 per cent exemption for a shareholding is only applicable to certain unquoted companies (see page 07). For these purposes, shares admitted to AIM are regarded as unquoted. The investment must be held for at least two years before a chargeable transfer for IHT purposes.
Saigon Sally
22 Oct 2017
IHT exempt on AIM? There is an article in Questor last week pointing out that trading (as opposed to Investment) company stocks in AIM are IHT exempt. One assumes this applies to HCM, does anyone know?SS, with no plans to kick the bucket any time soon...
Saigon Sally
22 Oct 2017
Re: Bloomberg Article Thurs 19th Oct Interesting article, thank you, David. Three stocks were mentioned as having surged after the change in the Chinese law announced 8 October but not HCM. Is there a reason for this?Thanks,
David Global
21 Oct 2017
Bloomberg Article Thurs 19th Oct Here is an interesting article published by Bloomberg on Thursday with the leading strapline"(Bloomberg) -- As money rushes into China£s fledgling biotechnology sector,£Eli Lilly & Co. and other foreign drugmakers are scaling back."Could that be an opportunity I wonder in the context of the deal Beigene has done with Celgene? Could we possibly do a similar deal with Eli Lilly?hxxps://www.bloombergquint.com/china/2017/10/19/china-s-biotech-promise-is-struggling-to-keep-foreign-innovatorsI continue to buy
David Global
20 Oct 2017
Stocktwits Anyone care to join me on Stocktwits??[link]
David Global
20 Oct 2017
New Reuters article from 19th Oct New Reuters article from 19th Oct[link] continue to buy
David Global
20 Oct 2017
New Research Note [link] Edison have stated:-"We place our forecasts and valuation under review as we revisit our peak sales assumptions.They will probably be increasing them!
David Global
20 Oct 2017
Re: Slater fund I agree Maru, the current P/E may sound ridiculously high but at least it is positive number, well, for the last FY. However, there are many Biotechs listed in trhe U.S. with larger market caps who have no earnings whatsoever, eg. BGNEJUNOTSROClearly once we start getting revenues and/or royalties from Frquintinib next year followed by Savolitinib the current P/E will drop on the assumption the mcap doesn't rise too far.A good peer to compare is Genmab, currently on a P/E of 60, which appears reasonable. The average P/E for Biotech sector at the moment is:-China 86.16United States 63.39I continue to buy
Boring Bernie
19 Oct 2017
Re: Slater fund SportyThe definition of "indirect" voting rights is in [link] but I'm not going to pretend to understand it.As for why is the sp dropping. Well, it might be related to Slater reducing, esp. if people misread the RNS and sold out thinking he'd sold ~ 1.5 million shares , but I think it's "just one of those things", and a bit of froth is being blown off the sp.When the situation is reversed, and the sp rises by 5% without any particular reason, we just accept it. That's what I'll be doing here as well.
Maru118
19 Oct 2017
Re: Slater fund I too would like to know what the direct to indirect means. Good question mate, thanks for asking.
sporty investor
19 Oct 2017
Re: Slater fund Thanks Bernie for explaining the situation.Slater fund has sold 13000 shares. Is it a sufficient reason to cause the drop in share price we are witnessing today? Change of voting rights, 'direct to indirect' - what does this mean? Could someone please explain for the benefit of novices like me.
Maru118
19 Oct 2017
Re: Slater fund I think Mark is doing the sensible thing and simply rebalancing his portfolio, I said it last week, I do believe HCM is overpriced at the moment. It is trading at ridiculously high P/E, which means the market is putting a lot of faith in FUTURE earnings. It would be nice to see this share move upwards while also being supported by the bottom line. This is why I sold half of my holdings last week. I'm in for a free ride, and if the price traces back towards my buy in price, I'll accumulate more with my profit.
Boring Bernie
19 Oct 2017
Re: Slater fund He's effectively sold 13,000. I say effectively because he's changed from having direct voting rights to indirect voting rights on a shed load of shares, but that's incidental really, 13,000 is the change.Given he dropped below 3% yesterday, and 3% equates to 1822504 shares, then he must have sold the majority ( if not all ) of the 13,000 shares yesterdayIf >= 11,000 shares don't show up in yesterdays trades, then it likely means he sold ADR's in the States.
sporty investor
19 Oct 2017
Slater fund Could anyone provide information about the number of shares sold by the fund and on which date? If it was yesterday, were those numbers shown on " trade" data above? If not, why?
