FARMINGDALE, N.Y., Dec. 16, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Enzo Biochem, Inc. ENZ ("Enzo" or the "Company") today announced financial results for the fiscal first quarter ended October 31, 2024. First Quarter Highlights Enzo ended the first quarter with aggregate cash and cash equivalents of $47.7 million. The net cash used in operating activities during the first quarter decreased by $4.4 million compared to the prior year. The Company's first-quarter revenue of $6.2 million declined year-over-year by 20% due to declining market demand related to general continued headwinds in the life sciences tools space. Recent Events The declared special cash dividend of $0.10 per share on its common stock was paid on December 2, 2024 to the holders of record as of the close of business on November 15, 2024. Jon Couchman became a director of the Company and member of the Company's Audit Committee, Nominating & Governance Committee and Compensation Committee effective November 22, 2024. Mr. Couchman is the Managing Member of Couchman Management LLC, an investment management company through which he manages private investments. Mr. Couchman has significant public company director experience and has served in various executive leadership roles. About Enzo Biochem Enzo Biochem, Inc. has operated as a life sciences company for over 45 years. The primary business of Enzo today is conducted through its Life Sciences division, Enzo Life Sciences, which focuses on labeling and detection technologies from DNA to whole cell analysis, including a comprehensive portfolio of thousands of high-quality products, including antibodies, genomic probes, assays, biochemicals, and proteins. The Company's proprietary products and technologies play central roles in translational research and drug development areas, including cell biology, genomics, assays, immunohistochemistry, and small molecule chemistry. The Company monetizes its technology primarily via sales through our global distribution network and licensing. For more information, please visit enzo.com or follow Enzo Biochem on X and LinkedIn . Forward-Looking Statements Except for historical information, the matters discussed in this release may be considered "forward-looking" statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Such statements include declarations regarding the intent, belief or current expectations of the Company and its management, including those related to cash flow, gross margins, revenues and expenses, which are dependent on a number of factors outside of the control of the Company, including, inter alia, the markets for the Company's products, cost of goods sold, other expenses, government regulations, litigation, and general business conditions. See Risk Factors in the Company's Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2024. Investors are cautioned that any such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve a number of risks and uncertainties that could materially affect actual results. The Company disclaims any obligations to update any forward-looking statement as a result of developments occurring after the date of this release. Enzo Biochem Contacts For Enzo Biochem: Patricia Eckert, Chief Financial Officer Enzo Biochem 631-755-5500 peckert@enzo.com Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures by Enzo The non-GAAP financial measures contained in this press release (including, without limitation, Adjusted net loss, EBITDA, and Adjusted EBITDA) are not GAAP measures of the Company's financial performance or liquidity and should not be considered as alternatives to net income (loss) as a measure of financial performance or cash flows from operations as measures of liquidity, or any other performance measure derived in accordance with GAAP. A reconciliation of such non-GAAP measures is included in the presentation of the Company's financial results for the quarter ended October 31, 2024 contained herein and is also available in the investor relations section of the Company's website ( https://www.enzo.com ). The Company believes the presentation of these non-GAAP measures provides useful additional information to investors because they provide information consistent with that on which management evaluates the financial performance of the Company. The Company manages its business based on its operating cash flows. It refers to EBITDA as its primary indicator of performance and refers to Adjusted EBITDA to further exclude items of a non-recurring nature. It is reasonable to expect that one or more excluded items will occur in future periods, though the amounts recognized can vary significantly from period to period. You are encouraged to evaluate each adjustment used to determine a non-GAAP financial measure and the reasons management considers it appropriate for supplemental analysis. Our presentation of these measures should not be construed as an inference that our future results will be unaffected by unusual or non-recurring items. We refer you to the tables attached to this press release, which includes reconciliation tables of GAAP net loss to Adjusted net loss and GAAP net loss to EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA. ENZO BIOCHEM, INC. (in thousands, except per share data) Three months ended Selected operations data: October 31, (unaudited) 2024 2023 Revenues $ 6,213 $ 7,806 Gross profit 2,280 3,455 Gross profit % 37 % 44 % Operating loss (3,622 ) (5,476 ) Net loss from continuing operations (3,071 ) (5,675 ) Net loss from discontinued operations (305 ) (941 ) Net loss $ (3,376 ) $ (6,616 ) Net loss per common share – basic and diluted – Continuing Operations ($0.07 ) ($0.11 ) Net loss per common share – basic and diluted – Discontinued Operations $0.00 ($0.02 ) Total net loss per basic and diluted common share ($0.07 ) ($0.13 ) Weighted average common shares outstanding – basic and diluted 52,244 50,184 Selected balance sheet data: 10/31/2024 (unaudited) 7/31/2024 (unaudited) Cash and cash equivalents $ 47,735 $ 52,371 Working capital 36,264 45,237 Stockholders' equity 47,658 56,112 Total assets 75,291 85,764 The following table presents a reconciliation of reported net loss and basic and diluted net loss per share to Adjusted net loss and Adjusted basic and diluted net loss per share for the three months ended October 31, 2024. ENZO BIOCHEM, INC. Non-GAAP Reconciliation Table (Unaudited, in thousands, except per share data) Three months ended October 31, 2024 Reported GAAP loss $ (3,376 ) Adjusted for: Discrete legal matters 288 One time inventory provision 252 Net loss from discontinued operations 305 Adjusted net loss $ (2,531 ) Weighted Shares Outstanding: Basic and diluted 52,244 Basic and diluted earnings per share: Basic and diluted net loss per share GAAP ($0.07 ) Basic and diluted net loss per share non-GAAP ($0.05 ) The following table presents a reconciliation of reported GAAP net loss for the three months ended October 31, 2024 to EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA: ENZO BIOCHEM, INC. EBITDA & Adjusted EBITDA Reconciliation Table (Unaudited, in thousands) Three months ended October 31, 2024 GAAP net loss $ (3,376 ) Plus (minus): Depreciation and amortization 319 Interest (income) expense, net (620 ) EBITDA (3,677 ) Adjusted for: Discrete legal matters 288 One time inventory provision 252 Net loss from discontinued operations 305 Foreign exchange loss 192 Adjusted EBITDA $ (2,640 ) © 2024 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.
PHILADELPHIA (AP) — Jamal Mashburn Jr. scored 18 points as Temple beat Buffalo 91-71 on Sunday. Read this article for free: Already have an account? To continue reading, please subscribe: * PHILADELPHIA (AP) — Jamal Mashburn Jr. scored 18 points as Temple beat Buffalo 91-71 on Sunday. Read unlimited articles for free today: Already have an account? PHILADELPHIA (AP) — Jamal Mashburn Jr. scored 18 points as Temple beat Buffalo 91-71 on Sunday. Mashburn shot 6 for 10 (3 for 6 from 3-point range) and 3 of 4 from the free-throw line for the Owls (8-5). Zion Stanford scored 15 points while going 4 of 9 and 6 of 7 from the free-throw line. Quante Berry had 15 points and shot 7 of 8 from the field and 0 for 4 from the foul line. The Bulls (5-7) were led by Tyson Dunn, who posted 11 points and four assists. Anquan Boldin Jr. added 11 points and three steals for Buffalo. Noah Batchelor also had nine points and six rebounds. Temple took the lead with 5:38 remaining in the first half and never looked back. The score was 39-29 at halftime, with Shane Dezonie racking up seven points. Temple outscored Buffalo in the second half by 10 points, with Mashburn scoring a team-high 13 points after intermission. ___ The Associated Press created this story using technology provided by Data Skrive and data from Sportradar. Advertisement
Earth just experienced its second-warmest November on record — second only to 2023 — making it all but certain that 2024 will end as the hottest year ever measured, according to a report Monday by European climate service Copernicus. Last year was the hottest on record due to human-caused climate change coupled with the effects of an El Nino. But after this summer registered as the hottest on record — Phoenix sweltered through 113 consecutive days with a high temperature of at least 100 degrees Fahrenheit — scientists anticipated 2024 would set a new annual record as well. In November, global temperatures averaged 14.10C (57.38F). Last year's global average temperature was 14.98C (59F). FILE - People are silhouetted against the sky at sunset Nov. 12 as they run in a park in Shawnee, Kan. Jennifer Francis, a climate scientist at the Woodwell Climate Research Center in Cape Cod, who wasn't involved in the report, said the big story about November is that "like 2023, it beat out previous Novembers by a large margin." This also likely will be the first calendar year in which the average temperature was more than 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial times, the report said. The 2015 Paris Agreement said human-caused warming should be limited to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), and ideally below 1.5. In the following years, the world's top scientist said limiting to 1.5 was crucial to stave off the worst impacts of climate change, such as increasing destructive and frequent extreme weather events. Scientists say the main cause of climate change is the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas. That "does not mean that the Paris Agreement has been breached, but it does mean ambitious climate action is more urgent than ever," said Copernicus Deputy Director Samantha Burgess. A young family visiting Washington cools off from the warm weather in a fountain Nov. 6 at the base of the Washington Monument. Francis said the new records are "terrible news for people and ecosystems." "The pace of warming is so fast that plants and animals cannot adapt as they always have during previous changes in the Earth's climate. More species will go extinct, which disrupts natural food webs they're a part of. Agriculture will suffer as pollinators decline and pests flourish," she said, also warning that coastal communities will be vulnerable to sea-level rise. Heat waves over the oceans and a loss of reflective sea ice and snow cover probably contributed to the temperature increase this year, experts said. Copernicus said the extent of Antarctic sea ice in November was 10% below average, a record. Oceans absorb about 90% of the heat trapped by greenhouse gases, later releasing heat and water vapor back into the atmosphere. Last year's record heat was caused partly by an El Nino — a temporary natural warming of parts of the central Pacific that alters weather worldwide. People walk Nov. 27 on an autumn-colored ginkgo tree-lined avenue in Tokyo. But that ended this year and a cooling effect that often follows, called La Nina, failed to materialize, leaving the scientific community "a little perplexed by what's going on here ... why temperatures are staying high," said Jonathan Overpeck, a climate scientist at the University of Michigan. One explanation is that an El Nino releases more heat to the atmosphere because of warmer ocean waters, then "we're not getting the cooling effect that often in decades gone by helps bring the temperature back down," Overpeck said. "So it does look like this could be contributing to the acceleration of global warming. But this year, he said, "is such a big jump following yet another jump, and that's a scary thing." It's no secret that a warming world will drive food prices higher, a phenomenon increasingly known as " heatflation ." What's less known, but a growing area of interest among economists and scientists alike, is the role individual extreme weather events — blistering temperatures in Texas , a destructive tornado in Iowa — may have on what U.S. consumers pay at the supermarket. At first glance, the answer might seem logical: A drought or flood that impacts agricultural production will, eventually, drive up prices. But it's not that simple, because what consumers pay for groceries isn't only reflective of crop yields or herd sizes, but the whole supply chain. As Grist reports, that's where it gets interesting: Economists are beginning to see a growing trend that suggests weather forecasts play a part in sticker shock. Sometimes the mere prediction of an extreme event — like the record-breaking temperatures, hurricanes, and wildfires forecasters are bracing for this summer — can prompt a spike in prices. It isn't the forecast itself to blame, but concerns about what the weather to come might mean for the entire supply chain, as food manufacturers manage their risks and the expected future value of their goods, said Seungki Lee, an agricultural economist at Ohio State University. "When it comes to the climate risk on food prices, people typically look at the production side. But over the last two years, we learned that extreme weather can raise food prices, [cause] transportation disruptions, as well as production disruptions," said Lee. How much we pay for the food we buy is determined by retailers, who consider the producer's price, labor costs, and other factors. Any increases in what producers charge is typically passed on to consumers because grocery stores operate on thin profit margins. And if manufacturers expect to pay more for commodities like beef or specialty crops like avocados in the future, they may boost prices now to cover those anticipated increases. "The whole discussion about the climate risks on the food supply chain is based on probabilities," Lee said. "It is possible that we do not see extreme temperatures this summer, or even later this year. We may realize there was no significant weather shock hitting the supply chain, but unfortunately that will not be the end of the story." Supply chain disruptions and labor shortages are among the reasons food prices have climbed 25 percent since 2020 . Climate change may be contributing as well. A study published earlier this year found " heatflation " could push them up by as much as 3 percentage points per year worldwide in just over a decade and by about 2 percentage points in North America. Simultaneous disasters in major crop and cattle producing regions around the world — known as multi-breadbasket failure — are among the primary forces driving these costs. Crop shortages in these regions may also squeeze prices, which can create volatility in the global market and bump up consumer costs. Historically, a single, localized heat wave or storm typically wouldn't disrupt the supply chain enough to prompt price hikes. But a warming world might be changing that dynamic as extreme weather events intensify and simultaneous occurrences of them become the norm. How much this adds to consumers' grocery bills will vary, and depends upon whether these climate-fueled disasters hit what Lee calls "supply chain chokepoints" like vital shipping channels during harvest seasons. "As the weather is getting more and more volatile because of climate change, we are seeing this issue more frequently," he said. "So what that means is the supply chain is getting more likely to be jeopardized by these types of risks that we have never seen before." An ongoing drought that plagued the Mississippi River system from the fall of 2022 until February provides an excellent example of this. The Mississippi River basin, which covers 31 states, is a linchpin of America's agricultural supply chain. It produces 92 percent of the nation's agricultural exports, 78 percent of the world's feed grains and soybeans , and most of the country's livestock. Vessels navigating its roughly 2,350 miles of channels carry 589 million tons of cargo annually . Transportation barriers created by low water, seen above, hampered the ability of crop-producing states in the Corn Belt to send commodities like corn and soybeans, primarily used for cattle feed, to livestock producers in the South. Thus emerged a high demand, low supply situation as shipping and commodity prices shot up , with economists expecting consumers to absorb those costs . Past research showing that retail prices increase alongside commodity prices suggests that the drought probably contributed to higher overall food costs last year — and because droughts have a lingering impact on production even after they end, it may be fueling stubbornly high grocery prices today. But although it seems clear that the drought contributed to higher prices, particularly for meat and dairy products, just how much remains to be gauged. One reason for that is a lack of research analyzing the relationship between this particular weather event and the consumer market. Another is it's often difficult to tease out which of several possible factors, including global trade, war, and export bans , influence specific examples of sticker shock. While droughts definitely prompt decreases in agricultural production, Metin Çakır, an economist at the University of Minnesota, says whether that is felt by consumers depends on myriad factors. "This would mean higher raw ingredient costs for foods sold in groceries, and part of those higher costs will be passed onto consumers via higher prices. However, will consumer prices actually increase? The answer depends on many other supply and demand factors that might be happening at the same time as the impact of the drought," said Çakır. In a forthcoming analysis previewed by Grist, Çakır examined the relationship between an enduring drought in California, which produces a third of the nation's vegetables and nearly two-thirds of its fruits and nuts , and costs of produce purchased at large grocery retailers nationwide. While the event raised consumer vegetable prices to a statistically significant degree, they didn't increase as much as Çakır expected. This capricious consumer cost effect is due largely to the resiliency of America's food system . Public safety nets like crop insurance and other federal programs have played a large part in mitigating the impacts of adverse weather and bolstering the food supply chain against climate change and other shocks. By ensuring farmers and producers don't bear the brunt of those losses, these programs reduce the costs passed on to consumers. Advanced agricultural technology, modern infrastructure, substantial storage, and efficient transport links also help ensure retail price stability. A 2024 study of the role climate change played on the U.S. wheat market from 1950 to 2018 found that although the impact of weather shocks on price variability has increased with the frequency of extreme weather, adaptive mechanisms, like a well-developed production and distribution infrastructure with sufficient storage capacity, have minimized the impact on consumers. Still, the paper warns that such systems may collapse when faced with "unprecedented levels of weather variability." Last year was the world's warmest on record , creating an onslaught of challenges for crop and livestock producers nationwide. And this year is primed to be even more brutal , with the transition from El Niño — an atmospheric phenomenon that warms ocean temperatures — to La Niña , its counterpart that cools them. This cyclical change in global weather patterns is another potential threat for crop yields and source of supply chain pressures that economists and scientists are keeping an eye on. They will be particularly focused on the Midwest and stretches of the Corn Belt, two regions prone to drought as an El Niño cycle gives way to a La Niña, according to Weston Anderson, an assistant research scientist at the University of Maryland and NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. Those growing regions for corn and soybeans are what he'll be watching closely as La Niña develops. It's something Jennifer Ifft, an agricultural economist at Kansas State University, is also thinking about. "If you have a very severe drought in the Corn Belt ... that's going to be the biggest deal, because that's gonna raise the cost of production for cattle, hogs, poultry," said Ifft. "So that would probably have the largest inflationary impacts." As of January , U.S. beef herd inventory was at its lowest in 73 years, which multiple reports noted is due to the persisting drought that began in 2020 . Americans, the majority of whom are already spending more on groceries than last year, are poised to soon see "record" beef prices at the supermarket. Food prices are also expected to rise another 2.2 percent in 2024 , according to the USDA's Economic Research Service. In a world enmeshed in extremes, our already-fragile food supply chain could be the next system teetering on the edge of collapse because of human-caused climate change. And costlier groceries linked to impending risk is the first of many warning signs that it is already splintering. This story was produced by Grist and reviewed and distributed by Stacker Media. Local Weather Get the daily forecast and severe weather alerts in your inbox!
The decision by special counsel Jack Smith, who had fiercely sought to hold Mr Trump criminally accountable for his efforts to subvert the 2020 election, represented the end of the federal effort against the former president following his election victory this month despite the election-related cases and multiple other unrelated criminal charges against him. The move, announced in court papers, marks the end of the Justice Department’s landmark effort to hold Mr Trump accountable for what prosecutors called a criminal conspiracy to cling to power in the run-up to his supporters’ attack on the US Capitol on January 6 2021. In court papers, prosecutors said the Justice Department’s position “is that the Constitution requires that this case be dismissed before the defendant is inaugurated”. Mr Smith’s team emphasised that the move to abandon the prosecutions, in federal courts in Washington and Florida, was not a reflection of their view on the merits of the cases but rather a reflection of their commitment to longstanding department policy. “That prohibition is categorical and does not turn on the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the Government’s proof, or the merits of the prosecution, which the Government stands fully behind,” the prosecutors wrote in Monday’s court filing in the election interference case. The decision was expected after Mr Smith’s team began assessing how to wind down both the 2020 election interference case and the separate classified documents case in the wake of Mr Trump’s victory over Vice President Kamala Harris. The Justice Department believes Trump can no longer be tried in accordance with longstanding policy that says sitting presidents cannot be prosecuted. Mr Trump has cast both cases as politically motivated and has vowed to fire Mr Smith as soon as he takes office in January. The 2020 election case brought last year was once seen as one of the most serious legal threats facing the Republican as he vied to reclaim the White House. However, it quickly stalled amid legal fighting over Mr Trump’s sweeping claims of immunity from prosecution for acts he took while in the White House. The US Supreme Court in July ruled for the first time that former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution, and sent the case back to US District Judge Tanya Chutkan to determine which allegations in the indictment, if any, could proceed to trial. The case was just beginning to pick up steam again in the trial court in the weeks leading up to this year’s election. Mr Smith’s team filed a lengthy brief in October laying out new evidence they planned to use against him at trial, accusing him of “resorting to crimes” in an increasingly desperate effort to overturn the will over voters after he lost to President Joe Biden.Kalel Mullings and the Michigan Wolverines pulled off one of the biggest upsets of the 2024 college football season during Rivalry Week, defeating the No. 2 Ohio State Buckeyes 13-10 at Ohio Stadium in Columbus. After the game was tied a 10 apiece for a majority of the second half, Michigan made their way to the Ohio State three-yard line and made a go-ahead field goal with 45 seconds remaining. The Buckeyes had another chance to at least send the game to overtime but failed to move the ball down the field with their limited time, turning it over on downs. After the game, Michigan players celebrated by planting a flag with the team's logo in the middle of the Ohio State field. This caused a massive brawl to ensue, with players from both squads throwing punches and tossing each other to the turf. © Adam Cairns/Columbus Dispatch / USA TODAY NETWORK via Imagn Images Although it appeared the Wolverines sparked the fight by planting their flag, Michigan running back Kalel Mullings had different ideas on who started it, assigning blame to the Buckeyes for not knowing "how to lose." "For such a great game, you hate to see stuff like that after the game," Mullings said. "That's just bad for the sport. Bad for college football. But at the end of the day... they gotta learn how to lose, man. You can't be fighting and stuff just cause you lost a game." Mullings went on to call the Ohio State players "classless" for their actions that led to the unfortunate scene. "We had 60 minutes, we had four quarters to do all that fighting, and now people want to talk and fight," Mullings added. "That's wrong. You know, it's just bad for the game. Classless, in my opinion. People got to be better." "You hate to see stuff like that after the game. It's just bad for the sport, bad for CFB... They gotta learn how to lose man. You can't be fighting." @JennyTaft speaks with Michigan's Kalel Mullings after a fight broke out between Ohio State and Michigan after the game ⬇️ pic.twitter.com/z6rmxu2YJQ Mullings, the senior out of West Roxbury, Massachusetts, was arguably the best player on the field in the rivalry game. He recorded 32 carries for 116 yards and the Wolverines' lone touchdown of the day. Mullings also nearly doubled the output of quarterback Davis Warren, who only threw for 62 yards. Michigan (7-5, 5-4 in Big 10 play) will enter its bowl game with an extra confidence boost. However, its chances to defend its national championship from a season ago are long gone. Meanwhile, Ohio State (10-2, 7-2 in Big 10 play) is likely out of the Big 10 Championship Game, barring a miracle. Still, the Buckeyes should be planning on a College Football Playoff appearance in the first year with a 12-team format. Related: Police Appear to Use Pepper Spray on Michigan, Ohio State Players During BrawlNone
