Bioprogress is a stock I have been in and out of quite a few times since it floated in May but not much mention here on the Investors' Room. Does anyone else follow this stock. I see it is up 1.5p today and a few good buyers seem to have appeared.

HENCE SET FIT ON?

NO THEFTS NIECE ?

SCENE - NOT THIEF

o going to bed

I have nothing to say but I do like this pic

Jumpin - best to just SWIG your medicine and accept responsibility for the investment?

LOL

Blimey, everyone's turned up now!

FREEDOM FOR TOOTING!

ROFLMAO!

THE TELEGRAPH

Aim-listed biopharmaceuticals company Bioprogress fell a further 4.25 to 65.25p on heavy turnover of 22.4m shares. After the market closed, the group said its intellectual property court case against Stanelco in June will have a major impact on 2004 results, but described its long-term prospects as excellent. Bioprogress is expected to receive damages from Stanelco in early 2005.

THE GUARDIAN

Keep an eye on BioProgress, the tablet coatings maker, this morning. City dealers expect its shares to be heavily traded as investors digest the implication of last night's after-hours trading update. This said that the company will make a loss of approaching 7m. The company's broker, Collins Stewart, had been expecting BioProgress to make a profit of 1.5m. BioProgress, which started the week at 90p, closed 4.25p lower at 65.25p.

THE INDEPENDANT

The downward pressure on Bioprogress shares continued through the day, sending the stock down a further 4.25p to 65.25p. The company, which makes dissolvable coatings, has been the subject of a string of bearish rumours and finally got round to issuing a trading statement after the market closed. This revealed that a recent acquisition has underperformed, meaning it will miss revenue forecasts, but scotched more vicious rumours of problems with its development projects.

THE TIMES

Bioprogress shed 4p to 65p but is expected to open lower today after giving warning after close on slow progress on licensing deals.

Well worth a read from the other place

mad mike - 18 Nov'04 - 23:08 - 801 of 824

For those that studied the CS Brokers note in enough detail to produce their own P&L & Cash flow spreadsheet, you could have spotted a few obvious errors in the CS note at the time (FYI, I passed related comments back to the CS analyst at the time). A couple of these errors partly explained what some people are now referring to as a profit warning today:-
- I don't believe depreciation was properly accounted for.
- the CS note failed to account for payments that BPRG had to pay to the previous owners of BioTec as part of the original purchase argreement i.e. in addition to an initial sum ($3.5M), all BioTec profits need to be paid back until a cumulative figure of $7.5M is achieved (i.e. $11M in all). This arrangement was well known and clearly spelled out in the original Aquafilm/BioTec RNS.

When you allow for the above and:-
1) the 3.3M exceptional legal/consultation costs (that the CS analysts also appears not to have included, and some of which would have been unknown by the CS analyst at the time). This shouldn't have been a surprise as something similar was mentioned in the interims, and anyone follwing the Court Case would have know that the main costs/damages/insurance re-imbursement probably won't occur until 2005.

2) plus allow for the reduction of a BioTec's net operating profit of 0.5M to a 1M loss,

Then I can get to a roughly similar figure for Profit(FRS3) and Cash balance close to that in today's RNS. Although my Profit figure does depend upon how BPRG intend to account for the initial one off payments to BioTec's previous owners in BPRG's financial figures.

This paints a slightly different story than just saying BPRG has gone from forecasting a 1M profit in 2004 to almost a 7M loss. That is, the differences are made up of:-
- some omissions by the CS analyst (which others may also have noticed),
- exceptional (one off) legal/consultation costs, taking 3.3M off the 2004 bottom line (which shouldn't have been a surprise),
- changes in BioTec's short-term priorities that have taken 1.5M off the 2004 bottom line.

When I feed all of this into my spreadsheet, and heavily discount valuations back to today (including discounted cash flow), then an approximate 'fair' share price today is between 118p-155p(based on 2005's figures) or 125p-185p(based on 2006's figures).

So it looks to me like there is a lot of upside to this share, after taking account of today's announcements, even without including new customer announcments over the next weeks (though in BPRG time this probably equates to next few months).

Edit duplicate deleted

Morning all.

I sit here thinking I was/am right... Glad I held and will reap the rewards in the future....

And why the fcuk would I want to move my shed across the bridge Bones ??? :-)

Also the comment re legal expenses wasn't me reverting to fundamentals as in my opinion they don't have any , just a dream that may or may not come off. The amount claimed as "exceptional" exceeds what they have been awarded as costs doesn't it ?

Take a look at GSK and AZN this morning and you will see this sector is full of scare stories, no news is good news right ?

EDITED: by MoneyAM

19/11/2004 - FMC BioPolymer is making progress in its collaboration with BioProgress and Harro Hoefliger on a machine to produce its recently-acquired NROBE tablet coating technology.

Link to full item

http://tinyurl.com/4a7c5

Ok, bounce today!! ;-) can't say the papers reported it very bullishly, but when did they ever know their a**e from a hole in the ground?

Dil - sounds like you need to sell the shed for a caravan. It'd be far easier to shift back and forth! ;-)))))

On the question of traders looking at charts mainly and then going for the fundies, I don't see it as much different from investors turning from short term into long term ones when something plummets. Human nature even if it's rather ostrich-like.

80-90p gonna be the price again then. We're below it so let's see when it breaks, eh?

Stann - can you verify your post or is it just speculation?

Interesting post from Stann:

EDITED by MoneyAM


Stann, can you verify it? I do hope so, this could be dangerous ground if untrue. If true, it's equally dangerous ground, but for others....