We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
No not me im afraid,his sleuthing is way beyond my pay grade.
Really sad faced rolly awwwww bless
Stodgy88, cellar boy yes good poster
Is it you? Haha thought I knew but you were not my suspicion?
I think it being us is already priced in. To get the rerate we need signed deals with others (which would be june/july). Unless this gov deal brings us over 100m. 10% royalty would do nicely, just hope its not a small flat fee, otherwise I think we could struggle to go above £3
14/03/2021
I am sure people have looked at the file name "GAD_Signed_Redacted"
Gad/mol are delivering phase 1 of the contract (ce marking the test and producing first commercial batches) at which stage they will pass to mologic to produce.
Rollyroll...this is just the UK Govt contract. Remember we are the test developer and any sales to European or other Govts/companies will be on a direct basis with us and we then engage others to manufacturer for us. This is a scratch my back partnership and there will be lots of different sales deals and different manufacturing locations/ deals. We have to stop thinking one size fits all...
Remember in parallel we are submitting CE for consumer use too.
Comparing the equivalent Omega redacted contract (£374mil), I notice that paragraphs 3.1.10 & 3.1.11 are omitted from the Omega contract. So, the question is, why would those two paragraphs feature in the Mologic/GAD contract, but not in the Omega contract? Assuming GAD & Omega will be making the same sovereign test, one would think those two paragraphs would be applicable to both manufacturers. It's a real brain teaser.
Mologic contract:
https://atamis-1928.cloudforce.com/sfc/p/#0O000000rwim/a/4J000000kI0I/7JhImQT1H1UrqPqg4p59bRgE4blKhAA7Z4WmPeWJCZE
Omega contract:
https://atamis-1928.cloudforce.com/sfc/p/#0O000000rwim/a/4J000000kI0H/EySZ28HhbGWp.KyQFExkrBzY54f6HXd6hOd1W5fDn3E
Roll on rolly your another wyndrum sold out byeeee
13.3.2.(i)...I think we are the test developer referred to and the redacted name us Mologic and they missed out some reactions.
The contract will be with GAD as the manufacturer and Mologic is the supplier referred to in the reductions as its a 7 letter redaction and we are the Test Developer referred to.
That's how I read it.
That sounds abot correct bella. But what does this license agreement mean for Avacta. Could we get short changed. The market was expecting 5m tests a month, so around 10m revenue a month. We need atleast 100m from this deal to justify oir market cap (with more coming from EU). If this is a small 50m deal, the SP could get hurt.
Looks to me as if 7 letters min, 8 max
If not Of..grrr
Of you read the Mologic Partnership RNS it's an Avacta test but as we are using the Mologic CE and ISO it will be under their banner as a quick route to market.
Someone on twitter has got a tape measure out and reckons the redaction length in the doc is exactly 6 letters in length
Avacta will supply the affimer which is IP protected.
Mologic will supply the LFT which will contain our Affimer and they will use GAD to manufacture it for them.
Avacta is not a manufacturer we have just licenced our affimer to Mologic.
The contract will be awarded to GAD because the Govt has financially supported the increased production facility.
Mologic have the CE and they have been taken with making sure all aspects of the product and production including our affimer are and will be compliant.
Or is this totally wrong...
Hello Guys. Can someone please post a link to this document? I have been out (working) all afternoon ….
under the tweet,have a read of cellar boy tweets,some excellent sleuthing.
https://twitter.com/towlie1981/status/1390550945361240070?s=21
So when you look at 3.1.10 (regardless of if Mologic should/shouldnt have been redacted)
**If so required by the Test Developer procure that xxxxx enters into a contract on terms required by the Authority for the Test Developer to grant a licence to Mologic of the Licensed IPR and Licensed Know How to enable it to carry out
its obligations as legal manufacturer of the Goods and such other terms as the Authority may require; and**
So 3.1.10 suggests someone may be required to license IP to Mologic, but GAD won't have the IP. So could this be Mologic in their capacity of "owning GAD" and this is a legal structure....as that sentence reads to me like Mologic is the manufacturer of the goods.
Mologic wouldn't have to license it's own IP to itself...so for me, this is AVCT or another left field entity who are "test developer"
You may call them ducks, I call them golden geese...
The protection of IP absolutely screams affimers. I think it's us, it could be us. Wonder if it's us?
Looks like the ducks are running around again