At a minimum, we know that several medical diagnostic imaging companies that use Tech-99 are already lining up non-HEU sources of supply, even in advance of commercial viability being established and FDA approval. Most of them will want multiple sources of supply.
You could probably get a few million dollars for the golf courses, another few million for the hotel, $0 for the injection wells, $0 for the waste business (which doesn't make any money), and net working capital is offset by long term debt. Stock is still a bit over-valued on a liquidation basis. You got a hodgepodge of garbage here that doesn;t make any money. The land and hotel and buildings are worth a little bit. That's it.
What do you think DRAD's agenda is w/re: to PESI? What is their endgame--just a small investment in the Permafix Medical sub as a "flier" and ultimately a possible source supply of Tech-99 at a preferred rate (if approved), or something bigger? The mix and history of DRAD and PESI and Mr. Climaco's hire broaches some interesting scenarios does it not? None of the inter-involvement is a coincidence.
I also think the DOE has its snout in this too, sniffing around (what they call lending a helping hand to produce a non-HEU source of Tech-99). Really need to keep the government out of private enterprise. Having them involved is a sure fire way to mess the whole deal up. You want the government (other than FDA approval) to have zero involvement in this and zero call on its future if successful.
I see also that NorthStar Medical radioisotopes is already in this area and has a relationship w/both GE Healthcare and Triad Isotopes, so I wonder what the edge is that PESI has? Is it who ever gets there first, or something else. GE has very deep pockets.
thx. for response. IIRC from most recent CC they implied they could begin seeking FDA and Europe approval/application almost at the same time if the scale up and design proves up. Two questions. Lots of things work and are technically doable, but do not make commercial sense. How confident can we be that this makes sense commercially w/o use of a large nuclear reactor? If it is "smaller batch" processing in smaller volumes from small research reactors do the economics still work, or is there a way to scale up to size so that it does makes sense from a profitability standpoint? I guess that is what the next step is all about. Secondly, once submitted, how much quicker could EU approval be obtained, hypothetically, than FDA approval if submitted simultaneously? Also, having trouble bridging the 2-3 year time frame to fruition vs. a supply crisis for Tech-99 within a year. What happens during the gap? They also said they expected to be full-scale by the end of 2015 and apply to the FDA shortly thereafter, so I am confused by the timeline here. But in theory you might expect the share price could react to each and any of several marker events:news that the scale -up proved feasible, that EU approval was obtained, that FDA approval was obtained, that orders were received, and so on. Also I assume that Tech-99 however produced is all the same and the quality of diagnostic imaging would be comparable w/PESI's method.
But I guess that is only a consideration further down the road and won't drive near term stock action. Stokluver, I agree if the process is commercial viable, the share price should pop quite significantly. Is the medical sub a foreign sub?, Maybe there is a reason they seeded it and listed it and ran it out of Poland via a shell company. The guys running PESI are smart about stuff like that. I don't think it is because it was the only place they could raise money.
The Medical Isotope business is the key, the home run swing for the fences that can clear all the bases. First it needs to work and then it needs to be scaleable. But there is a third consideration I can't get my arms around as to how it plays out. PESI has a proprietary patented process here. That is fact. When Chalk River closes they could also have a near monopoly on a preferred way to make Tech-99 in a couple years. But I worry about government intrusion in the interest of the "common weal" for a process, maybe the only process, that can save tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of lives of the American citizenry via medical diagnostic imaging (of course it would be applicable outside the U..S. as well). It's probably not an issue, but I wonder about an analog, like eminent domain, where the government intercedes itself for the benefit of the greater good and tries to limit the profit potential of such a process. They try to do it all the time w/life-saving drugs, especially Democrats who constantly bemoan "profiteering" by private pharma--- ignoring the decade or more and often billions of dollars of expense to discover and bring a drug to market. The government is expert at meddling, regulating, restricting, and even confiscating (it's tax time as we all know) what rightfully belongs to others in the name (or guise) of protecting the greater good. If the PESI process works and is commercially viable, they should be allowed to charge whatever the market will bear. But if they are one of the only source providers, I wonder how it all plays out. It's their patents, their discovered technology, their investment and know-how to be sure.
I would happily hold the Isotope stub if they spin that to shareholders and dump the shares in the primary business.
I view the possibility of the $2s as a short-term hiccup as this company is out of excuses, and the disappointing outlook for Q1 offered on the CC will not get a pass. Someone is quite obviously trying very hard to exit a position before that Q1 report due in a few weeks. Everything was upbeat on the prior CC, but this last one put the company right back in uncertain territory as regards DOE spending and timing. Moniz has his hands full w/Iran over the next 3-6 months. Spending on the business PESI is in, allocating funding , or even awarding contracts is the last thing on his mind or the DOE's agenda near term. I have switched my view of Permafix medical as being the cherry on top, to where it is now the sole reason you invest in this company and simply accept that the base business is awful and hope is can just trend breakeven while waiting on the isotope potential.
Regardless of seasonality, every single quarter has to show a profit, even if it is just one cent per share. The backlog has to build every quarter. The guidance has to be positive. If they lose money in any quarter, they need to downsize operations to make breakeven possible under the worst of circumstances.
Still think you can get it in the $2s off an upcoming weak Q1 release. You just cannot have any quarterly report that shows a loss per share--not in this market.
Industry-wide more likely contract re-negotiations at lower day rates than cancellations. Many of the contracts were put in place when oil was $100+ per barrel. Major oil companies probably don't want to cancel outright if a termination clause is prohibitively expensive, or possibly even non-existent. And I would guess they would be loathe just to walk away from a contract or try to finagle a force majeure out. They are not Russians you know who are unconcerned about legal recourse. But many will bring whatever pressure they can bear on the driller-provider to lower the previously agreed upon rate if they want to keep a good customer.That doesn't really matter to the driller when the market is under-supplied w/rigs and the demand for work is high. I think we are a ways off from that point. My guess is it would take oil at $80/bbl. sustained for 12 months for the majors to even consider stepping back in to the market. And when they do, they will tip toe slowly. The toughest distinction to ever make in investing is between a value and a value-trap. If someone doubles their investment and it takes 10 years they may consider that value at a 7% annual rate of return in today's low interest rate environment. Most institutional holders probably would. The best prospect for this company remains field de-commissioning work---if it is enforced.
Would be nice if they had exposure to an Iran nuclear deal, but the company seems not to be in the sweet spot of where the DOE wants to spend money. DOE isn't doing anything to give PESi a leg up.
Makes sense if you think you could see this stock back at $4.50 per share within two years. That's an annualized return of near double digits percent, w/a call on the Tech 99 business for free. Bad employment numbers and a weak Q1 for this company may give you a shot at buying it slightly under $3 per share near term, which would only enhance the upside potential. It's a hold at current price only because of the negative near term outlook due to shipment delays. Traders hate to hear the words: timing differences, delays, shift revenue to the next quarter, lumpiness. Investors won't mind as much. In this market everything is a trade right now given historically high valuations, and money is probably moving into dollar-hedged Europe opportunities instead for the rest of this year.
Not worried about Q2 either. A little worried about the Q3 comparison and being able to beat 20 cents earnings per share from 2014.
or canceled outright for a termination fee? I always thought a contract was a contract, that the word meant some sort of binding agreement. But both Barrons and Motley Fool have been reporting for weeks about a significant number of offshore drilling contract renegotiations or cancellations. They are saying some major oil companies are "demanding" renegotiated day rates in light of the huge drop in oil price. If the contract driller refuses, there is the implied threat of getting "blacklisted" by entire customer base when future works does indeed become available a few years down the road. Everyone knows which drillers "worked" w/their customers during the hard times and which refused to do so and stood solidly behind their contracts.