Adrian Hargrave, CEO of SEEEN, explains how the new funds will accelerate customer growth Watch the video 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.
"My understanding was that avacta have the option to repay in cash."
Yes i believe that is correct. My understanding is that Heights have the right to convert any amount at anytime - subject to Avacta repaying in cash if they have it.
Do Avacta have a spare £38m ?
No that's not right, heights can't just convert 38m in one go. The terms are set and the repayments are spread over the duration of the loan.
Yes the loan has 3 and half years to run and a lot of other things might happen over that time - saving some of the dilution.
They've done some ad hoc conversions already last year - look up the dates.
Would you mind providing the links you are referring to?
Look up the rns lists - from memory about april or when price was about 160
Or refer to the issue documents october 2022
What if someone is negotiating the purchase of DX? And this is inside info during closed period leading up to Prelims.
Or DX is being spun off as a completely seperate stand alone company .
What good will spinning off dx do for Avacta therapeutics or the cash position?
I imagine avacta are sounding out potential buyers for dx. Unfortunately it's currently loss making
It was silly to spend all that money on the dx companies
Livedataccount: 'It was silly to spend all that money on the dx companies' - Well that's some understatement - it was manifestly bloody stupid as many of us said at the time. Just another example of why AS needs to stand down for a competent senior pharma business executive who knows what he's doing.
AVCT is right ....HC can convert as much as they want when ever they want outside of the quarterly repayments and I guess the put that in place so they could get an even better return on spikes (which they have on several occasions in the past) .......If Avacta received £38m for DX tomorrow there is not a cat in hells chance they will pay Heights off.
AS is no different to any the other CEO's on AIM issuing shares is seen as free money (and that's where it differs form the Main Market) in the grand scheme of things (because he can always issue himself via the BOD a few more options) it makes no difference to him personally whether heights get 3m shares or 7m.......that's just the way it is
And just as a footnote.......when you have lived in Spain for 18 years and are married to a Spanish girl ......and have a couple of Spanish kids......my written English is not always so great
Bella,
if you don't mind me asking, how closely do you believe is AS aligned with shareholders?
He spoke yesterday about requiring a financial runway to support a strong negotiating position re; license deals, and clearly this is reasonable, but I think he needs to go one further and explain the boards' thinking around the Height's fund-raise and the DX investment case, to acknowledge mistakes, and demonstrate lessons have been learnt.
As was pointed out at the time by MM amongst others (probably yourself included), the DX acquisition was a terrible use of the companies' resources, and burdened the company with unnecessary debt, which ultimately left us in a position where we had to raise more funds at 50p.
If they cannot see or acknowledge errors, they probably won't learn, hence my question.
For info, been a SH since Feb 21, and building a stronger position every month. Not a trader, just want the company and SHs to do well.
M216, your question to Bella...wouldn't presume to answer on a technical level, but picked up from Q&A yesterday AS noted that many PIs are well researched and some moreso than the Institutional Investor shareholders.
Look forward to the day when Institutional investors hold more of Avacta's shares. Guessing that some see as too high risk atm and don't appreciate the potential.
"As was pointed out at the time by MM amongst others (probably yourself included), the DX acquisition was a terrible use of the companies' resources, "
NOT true MM lauded the purchase at the time - changed his tune end of last year.
Threw all his toys out the pram after losing £50k on a poor margin trade earlier this year.
AVCT - have re-read the RNS's at the time of the Height's raise, and the MM notes at the time.
On reflection, MM was positive about the DX acquisition, not sure where you get your reason for talking about someone's margin call - that is making a negative assumption, and you're playing the man not the ball, unnecessary. The reason for our travails have not been all AS or Avacta's fault. From a business/ science perspective they have been remarkably successful, and who here would think that a company having a trial demonstrating early signs of efficacy and amazing safety profile, would not have this somehow reflected in their SP, and not have BP biting their hands off for a valuable license deal. The above was the case in Jan 23 RNS.
To their credit they didn't take the cheap license deals that were 'offered', thereby devaluing the trial and the product. I would still, however like to hear some reasoning for the pump fake given to shareholders, around "funding, don't worry about it" followed months later, without retraction of the above statement, by a 50p fundraise to regain confidence that AS does have some alignment with shareholders, and we are not going to be trodden underfoot for AS's ambitions for Avacta and himself. I've been invested since Feb-21, and have been happy buying more shares each month for the past two years. This month, I would like to hear AS talking to shareholders openly.
"..not sure where you get your reason for talking about someone's margin call... "
Because, despite some good base research, imo MM is not the solution to volatility in Avacta's SP but part of the problem. So a large ill judged margin position is "part of the ball"
At the end of the day he doesn't do himself, or his followers, any favours!
Alan won’t talk openly to us. There will be a one liner in the next update that they needed to raise to keep the lights on. No apology. He’ll spew some nonsense about talks being ongoing (might even chuck an NDA reference in there for old times sake) and he can’t reveal anything. But shareholders won’t stand for it this time, he’s a goner if that happens.
Forever
In order to be open with shareholders AS must explain the company's strategy from the decision to buy Launch Diagnostics and the logic of accepting Convertible Bond financing to buy Launch bearing in mind the development costs of AVA6000 trials which must have been known at the time. Was the decision to buy Launch fully approved by the CFO at the time or were the views of the CFO over ridden by AS? Any 'honesty' requires this root cause of the later financial problems - which were painfully predicted by Tom W amongst others on a number of occasions - to be addressed. The latest 50p share placing can only be fully explained by going back to how we got into the financial mess caused by the purchase of Launch.
I very much doubt AS will go anywhere near explaining why Avacta bought an obvious 'Trojan Horse' such as Launch and 18 months later hoist a 'For Sale' sign over the whole Diagnostics division. To my mind it just goes to show how utterly clueless and incompetent AS is from a business perspective - yet he gives me the impression of being too blind and arrogant to accept his obvious faults and go back to the lab where he clearly belongs.
As I say, I remain a shareholder because I have followed Precision/AVA6000 since the pre-clinical trial days. If there is one thing I do agree with AS is that all the evidence to date shows that we appear to be on the way to cracking the 'holy grail' of chemo therapy with substantially reduced side effects in the form of AVA6000. AIMO of course.
Nano: "I very much doubt AS will go anywhere near explaining why Avacta bought an obvious 'Trojan Horse' such as Launch and 18 months later hoist a 'For Sale' sign over the whole Diagnostics division. To my mind it just goes to show how utterly clueless and incompetent AS is from a business perspective -"
I can see the (potential) logic of buying the companies inasmuch its a HUGE market, possibly bigger that the TX side of what AVCT are trying to do. AVCT already have/had a DX division. It may also have held out the promise of (relatively) immediate cash flow/profit. Certainly the development of affimers would have seemed at the time, a good fit to get it more quickly into the market.
My best guess on all this is that I think for whatever reason, there have been delays within the trial of AVA6k and this has completely upset the pathway timelines which not only affected cash flow projections done at the time, but also then cast doubt to further funders as to when this could be commercialised.
As to what business acumen the BoD have or don't have is impossible to say based on the limited info we have but as we all know the whole point of going public, on AIM, is the ability to raise "free money" for developing, loss making companies, and this is the perfect place for AVCT.
AIM is not quite the "wild west casino" some here imagine. Perhaps if they understood the high risk nature of companies that come to AIM, it would make more sense to them.
Windy, you should have trusted the science and bought in at 48p rather than buy in yesterday at 52 or whatever. 😉😉💯
I haven't bought in yet.
I do trust the science. About at least a year ago I said something like if not exactly: "Its not about the science, the market knows it works" in response to the market being declared and largely supported on this BB as "Thick as Mince".
I am keener than some here to make money from this stock. So to me timing is important.
The difference seems to be I am happy to pay, say, 60p a share if it looks more derisked and less likely to fall back, than buy ay 52p and it then falls to 40p and I could have got 25% more shares for the same money.
My undetstanding albeit from third hand is that diagnostic division was bought to launch affimer diagnostics.
The company failed to do due diligence and had to cancel launch due to infringement of others IP. At same time as this was happening our uber strap of a Chairman was publically stating funding wasnt an issue whilst arranging a mega share option scheme for himself.
Eventually Avacta left with a diagnostic white elephant, a huge hole in the finances and a financial commitment to someone who appears to either live in fantasy land or has no regard for the truth.
Is it actually possible for Ronnie to be any more boring?
Someone who attended the tea and stickies AGM event reported it. From what i remember AS promised a major update on diagnostics which was suddenly dropped on the day. Would seem odd a CEO avoiding a topic he promised to cover in detail - however given his inclination to only communicate with a chosen few i wouldnt be surprised if stuff got changed in translation.
On that note did McPumpy have another 1:1 not happen. Bit of a theme emerging.