Come and hear Shaun Day from Greatland Gold #GGP, Cathal Friel and Jeremy Skillington from Poolbeg Pharma #POLB, George Bennett from Rainbow Rare Earths #RBW and Helium One CEO David Minchin #HE1 present next Tues. Register 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:
You will only have one login account. Registering with multiple accounts is not allowed. Any user found to have more than one account on this site will have all, and any future accounts suspended permanently.
Your email and password must only be used by you. If a post is made under your account, it will be considered that it was posted by yourself.
Your account nickname must not be the same, or contain, listed company names or board members' names.
While debating and discussion is fine, we will not tolerate; rudeness, swearing, insulting posts, personal attacks, or posts which are invasive of another's privacy.
You will not;
discuss illegal or criminal activities.
post any confidential or price sensitive information or that is not public knowledge.
post misleading or false statements regarding the share price and performance. Such posts are deemed as market abuse, and may be reported to the appropriate authorities.
post any private communication, or part thereof, from any other person, including from a member of the board of directors of a listed company. Such posts cannot be verified as true and could be deemed to be misleading.
post any personal details (e.g. email address or phone number).
post live price or level 2 updates.
publish content that is not your original work, or infringes the copyright or other rights of any third party.
post non-constructive, meaningless, one word (or short) non-sense posts.
post links to, or otherwise publish any content containing any form of advertising, promotion for goods and services, spam, or other unsolicited communication.
post any affiliate or referral links, or post anything asking for a referral.
post or otherwise publish any content unrelated to the board or the board's topic.
re-post premium share chat posts on regular share chat.
restrict or inhibit any other user from using the boards.
impersonate any person or entity, including any of our employees or representatives.
post or transmit any content that contains software viruses, files or code designed to interrupt, destroy or limit the functionality of this website or any computer software or equipment.
If you are going to post non-English, please also post an English translation of your post.
If you are going to post non-English, please also post an English translation of your post.
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 and Verified Members
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East and have access to Premium Chat. 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.
It is hard to say without having access to the communications they had with government. Were Avacta misled by HMG, or did Avacta prematurely inflate expectations based on pre-contractual talks with them? The situation moved very fast (I believe Cummings described government as crashing about like a supermarket trolley), so what might have seemed like a dead cert one month, fell flat the next.
Equally, there isn't evidence that investors were deliberately misled. What motivation would there be for Avacta to do that?
GJ, I can't see any evidence that they acted in "good faith". In fact when you see how the saliva test was side lined along with BAMS test and BBI being dropped as a manufacturer some time after they knew ,suggests they do the minimum in updating the general market.
As for bella's speculation, anything is possible but everything (to me) points to some problem in manufacturing test. ND previously highlighted the lack of a large trial and again at one stage AVCT I think, were promising one but so far it has been a relatively small numbers and the absolute minimum to get the validation approved.
So I think there has been a manufacturing problem as that would explain the delays and BBI dropping out, It explains why Calibre sales got off to a slow start, why there have been no large orders (including big business and govt's) and why to date, we have not been advised of the 30m per month Asian manufacturing partner, this might be wrapped up with TT issues? My hope is that this has been resolved now and the update will be positive and address these points particularly too, the commercial validation for sales globally which after UK & EU certification, AS said were so similar as to be something of a formality and would not take long, but that was months ago.
… just a final word to clarify: if you continually present the absolute best-case scenario as the expected-case, without quantifying the risks along the way, I don’t believe that is presenting a fair and accurate appraisal. If the company was naive and being led by the nose, they should have got an experienced operator in to drive the process
You say you don't want to dissect the whole process, but it's important to frame the scenario when there are accusations of deliberate misleading of investors. Taking a step back we can see that Avacta and their management acted in good faith at all stages.
NDN, I genuinely don't think there was an intention to mislead investors. My feeling is that management fell into the trap of believing that it just follows that if you make the best test then the markets will buy it. I think they were naive on how government and politicians operate, and have been caught out.
Anyway, I don't want to sound too negative about the LFT's. The truth is no one has a clue how things are progressing on that front, as there haven't been any material updates in that respect. We might be mildly surprised if there's a solid revenue stream coming in that pays the wages.
Ok, I don’t want to dissect the whole process. The thread topic was how UK Govt sales continue to go with “inferior”products
Remember, though I always saw Govt orders as vital, the board narrative was that they were irrelevant and EU/RoW orders would drive sales.
I don’t remember hearing many voice dissenting that view on here during that period, and UK Govt equivocation never stopped Avacta producing a device, getting a large and credible CV out the door, and exploiting overseas markets in the meantime
Well you could argue that they were successful in developing an LFT, but got it to market too slow. However, we all know that something a bit fishy has been going on with the way that both the approval process has appeared to put up barriers and move goalposts, whilst opening the door to inferior tat.
We were in an emergency situation, so any grace that was afforded the likes of Innova could have been granted to Avacta and the other UK manufacturers. Instead, we saw one barrier after another put in the way, to the point where Mologic were even threatening to take the government to court. Hopefully the full story will emerge some day.
In reality, Avacta produced a first class product, in a short time frame. If it had been approved earlier, the likes of mologic, BBI etc. would have invested to ramp up production to required levels, and happily supplying part of the governments needs, if there had been the intent there on the governments part.
There is a question over communications, I won't deny that. Some of the statements regarding selling all we can make are a bit misleading and meaningless unless we know how many can be made, and recent updates on this front have been lacking. On the other hand, the market was notified that talks with the government were slow. This coupled with the shift to reliance on vaccines was a clue to everyone that the gravy train was coming to stop. I do not believe investors were deliberately misled however.
My take is that Avacta's reputation with respect to the science is intact, in fact I would even say boosted. This has been a brutal lesson on communication, and probably explains the radio silence now, but for sure the reputation has taken a dent in that respect.
Whether the SP takes a plunge on the back of a poor LFT update I do not know, and remains to be seen. My sense is that any sell off will be snapped up pretty sharpish.
Gje - the current price will be smashed if it is true that low/little revenue is expected from the LFT. The credibility of Avacta will be reflected in the SP, should this be the case. It won’t be allowed to move on, unpunished.
Let's not go there! There were plenty of opportunities to adjust exposure over the past few months, or ride some other opportunities back up :)
Really this does indicate that at this price there is almost zero expectation of any large LFT contracts. Any that happen to come along will be a decent bonus. Just looking at the current snapshot, in a sense this is a positive as this now appears to be a stable price.
“We anticipate very high demand for the COVID-19 rapid test and will be working with our preferred manufacturing partners at BBI to satisfy that demand. We are actively continuing our discussions with other manufacturing partners to ensure that we have access to additional manufacturing capacity to address the global need for SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing both now, and in the next few years.“
Worth considering not all that contract money is going to the Chinese. All these tests are bought via resellers, innova backed by us hedge fund etc. So they are taking their cut, a large cut I imagine.
I assume that is the end of any chance of a government test order. Best we can do is vote the corrupt bunch of criminals out next election. I have no idea why anybody voted for them anyway. Is Bethel still there? No coroboration.
something is very wrong, either with HMG, or with Avacta marketing.
Are the Gov not aware of the optics of feeding China whilst ignoring UK diagnostics? Are Avacta team just not good enough to get their foot in the door to make a deal?
Even if I were not invested. this situation of continually buying cheap chinese tests (whilst trying to hide behind buying from non Chinese distributors) instead of buying UK developed and manufactured tests with the best accuracy is just wrong.