New posts

Reply to thread

Message

Quick Take-outs:

+ Downgrade based on lower than forecast Assisted Repro cycles (ARS). Has every reason to rebound to historical norms unless infertile women have stopped wanting babies and/or men have stopped wanting to try put babies in them. I have no evidence of either.

+ Another explanation might be that ARS cycles are down because Fetal transfers (FET) are becoming so successful. Revenue per treatment is down because the mix of treatments is moving towards FET. Need to look into that. Management commentary from VRT-AU and MVF-AU makes no such statement, but they wouldn't.

+ Interesting that Propsectus measures looked primarily at revenue per ARS. Yet, in the HY release, more weight was placed on revenue per treatment. Not sure which is the best way to think of it.

+ Very large increase in Fetal transfers. Will result in a material increase in revenue per ARS cycle. This is a technological development which is unfolding.

+ They have termed out their debt via floating for fixed over half of the debt book. Reduces any concerns on debt sustainability. They have disclosed enough about their covenants to know what they are and how to calculate the main metrics. Thanks.

+ Competition from SA is dusted.

+ Diagnostics are doing well. They are the leader in the newest generation. VRT is in catch-up mode. This does affect ARS patient acquisitions.

Overall:

+ Pretty routine update with random pattern of movements to the downside on this occasion without any known reason why it would be a rebasing relative to an historical trend line.

+ Dividend is in-line.

Follow-up:

+ FET growth impact on ARS growth.

Other:

+ Not worth updating the valuation on present facts.

+ What is so magical about this $1.40 level that seems like a magnet to the share price??

<blockquote data-quote="DeepState" data-source="post: 862736" data-attributes="member: 58698">Quick Take-outs:+ Downgrade based on lower than forecast Assisted Repro cycles (ARS).&nbsp; Has every reason to rebound to historical norms unless infertile women have stopped wanting babies and/or men have stopped wanting to try put babies in them. I have no evidence of either.+ Another explanation might be that ARS cycles are down because Fetal transfers (FET) are becoming so successful.&nbsp; Revenue per treatment is down because the mix of treatments is moving towards FET.&nbsp; Need to look into that.&nbsp; Management commentary from VRT-AU and MVF-AU makes no such statement, but they wouldn&#039;t.&nbsp; + Interesting that Propsectus measures looked primarily at revenue per ARS.&nbsp; Yet, in the HY release, more weight was placed on revenue per treatment.&nbsp; Not sure which is the best way to think of it.+ Very large increase in Fetal transfers.&nbsp; Will result in a material increase in revenue per ARS cycle.&nbsp; This is a technological development which is unfolding.+ They have termed out their debt via floating for fixed over half of the debt book. Reduces any concerns on debt sustainability.&nbsp; They have disclosed enough about their covenants to know what they are and how to calculate the main metrics.&nbsp; Thanks.+ Competition from SA is dusted.+ Diagnostics are doing well.&nbsp; They are the leader in the newest generation.&nbsp; VRT is in catch-up mode.&nbsp; This does affect ARS patient acquisitions.Overall:+ Pretty routine update with random pattern of movements to the downside on this occasion without any known reason why it would be a rebasing relative to an historical trend line.+ Dividend is in-line.Follow-up:+ FET growth impact on ARS growth.Other: + Not worth updating the valuation on present facts.+ What is so magical about this $1.40 level that seems like a magnet to the share price??</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DeepState, post: 862736, member: 58698"] Quick Take-outs: + Downgrade based on lower than forecast Assisted Repro cycles (ARS). Has every reason to rebound to historical norms unless infertile women have stopped wanting babies and/or men have stopped wanting to try put babies in them. I have no evidence of either. + Another explanation might be that ARS cycles are down because Fetal transfers (FET) are becoming so successful. Revenue per treatment is down because the mix of treatments is moving towards FET. Need to look into that. Management commentary from VRT-AU and MVF-AU makes no such statement, but they wouldn't. + Interesting that Propsectus measures looked primarily at revenue per ARS. Yet, in the HY release, more weight was placed on revenue per treatment. Not sure which is the best way to think of it. + Very large increase in Fetal transfers. Will result in a material increase in revenue per ARS cycle. This is a technological development which is unfolding. + They have termed out their debt via floating for fixed over half of the debt book. Reduces any concerns on debt sustainability. They have disclosed enough about their covenants to know what they are and how to calculate the main metrics. Thanks. + Competition from SA is dusted. + Diagnostics are doing well. They are the leader in the newest generation. VRT is in catch-up mode. This does affect ARS patient acquisitions. Overall: + Pretty routine update with random pattern of movements to the downside on this occasion without any known reason why it would be a rebasing relative to an historical trend line. + Dividend is in-line. Follow-up: + FET growth impact on ARS growth. Other: + Not worth updating the valuation on present facts. + What is so magical about this $1.40 level that seems like a magnet to the share price?? [/QUOTE]

Verification