The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen 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.
AS is an opportunist and a scientist. We have no proof that he is a good scientist. And we have adequate evidence that he does not have the commercial nous to run a pharma company. He should not continue in his current position.
TG also has no pharma industry experience and his financial acumen is questionable to say the least. He needs to be removed.
Gemstar, why would you want to filter Touk ?
His post's are absolutely hilarious.
No chance!
"I think he believed that AVA6000 would perform well on lower FAP tumours and was caught off guard. Continuing to 7 rounds didn’t give him the results he needed to impress BP and he was forced into a fire sale fund raise."
This guy Toucankahmen seems to specialise in negative and damaging speculation, totally contrary to the facts
Filtered as just too annoying to read
Here's an example.
I am presently in Newcastle having watched my team get stuffed 5-1 and relegated.
Example :- Next year we are going to win the championship and be promoted.
I have to admit that's speculation on my part but with a little knowledge. Let's hope the pre match interview on Tues doesn't escalate the situation .
On an as
I was just checking to see who was listerning...haha!!!
🐂💩
Bella
Have you owned shares before and been involved in voting?
You seem very naive
Ice
For once I agree with you - we don’t want change at the moment. I know Al hasn’t got total control over the clinical trials but I think he was far too slow in moving to a two week cycle when it was obvious that the target trial population was too broad. I think he believed that AVA6000 would perform well on lower FAP tumours and was caught off guard. Continuing to 7 rounds didn’t give him the results he needed to impress BP and he was forced into a fire sale fund raise.
All along he has been the king of ambiguous communications knowing that enough of us would read these in the most positive light.
If arm2 doesn’t yield the impressive results we need then Avacta might not get the opportunity to roll out what would’ve been a fantastic pipeline of life saving treatments.
Jive_turkey...yes I would normally agree with you regarding not paying off the bond with cash...however, I did say all or part.
The Bond was issued based on:
'The funds raised pursuant to the Fundraise will also provide Avacta the balance sheet flexibility to continue to execute an M&A led growth strategy for its Diagnostics business, invest in those acquired businesses to drive growth, and to provide working capital for the wider Avacta group.'
I addded paying off the Bond in full or part because if a fund or funds are involved they might call the shots on this and might prefer to fund Avacta themselves.
All speculation though, of course...
Timster...yes you too could be right...
We will only know on Tuesday but if something financially significant is taking place they will have to tell us.
Sigh!!!!
Saint68..yes you are absolutely correct...unlike the single-vote rights that individuals commonly possess in democratic governments, the number of votes a shareholder has corresponds to the number of shares they own.
I was just checking to see who was listerning...haha!!!
Interesting idea Bella. Definitely possible that the 'important announcement' that it is the sale or spinoff of Dx. However, I don't agree with the rest of the theory. They will never pay off the bond with cash. The cash is always better used to fund the pipeline. Getting new money (either through a sale or a raise), to pay off other debts is simply not something that young biotechs do. They are always cash hungry.
"So what news are they going to give us on Tuesday in addition to the Results...???"
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say nothing or perhaps cohort 2 of 2w dosing starting.
Bella - not sure this statement is correct “ Any vote by shareholders is 1 man 1 vote so a PI with 10 shares has just as much sway as an II with 10,000,000”
I think it’s 1 vote per share :
Standard ordinary shares, which are issued by the vast majority of new companies, carry one vote per share. Any shareholder who owns at least one ordinary share has the right to attend general meetings and vote on certain company decisions
Now here's something for you all to chew over...
In Early 2022 the SP dipped and rose again in just under 4 months as follows:
31 Dec 2021 SP = 126.36
03 Mar 2022 SP = 41.39
22 April 2022 SP = 142.43
WHY....well, did someone know what was going on and wanted some cheap shares?
03 Feb 2022 RNS re AVA6000 Dose Escalation in P1 and then no further news for exactly 40 DAYS...then we get
16 Mar 2022 RNS Avacta sells the Animal Health Division...bingo!!! COINCIDENCE or WHAT???
This was a 40 day news blackout due to the sale of a company Division...not due to a fundraise or results closed period.
So what news are they going to give us on Tuesday in addition to the Results...???
Something to do with DX perhaps...a Spin Off perhaps...
A Spin-Off is when a parent company sells a specific business unit or division, i.e. a subsidiary, to effectively create a new standalone company. As part of the spin-off, the parent company's existing shareholders are given shares in the new independent company. Is that why DX is no longer really visible on the website?
Now if they Spin-Off DX then the proceeds could pay off the Bond - hence the reference to Cash payment in future (you have been told but not how much) and existing shareholders don't miss out because they get shares in the new company too hence the comment about shareholders don't need to worry about finance.
End result = Two stand alone businesses TX and DX in which existing shareholders have a holding in both and the DX Bond is paid off in part or full and TX is fully funded for next couple of years.
Question is who is involved in this and what connections do they have to the European Fund...
Is the European Fund one of these:
Medicxi, Pfizer Ventures, Gilde Healthcare, Advent Life Sciences LLP
Has one of the above invested heavily in the fundraise and they dictated the raise discounted price. At the same time they've brought someone to the table (one of their portfolio) who is keen to take on DX and facilitate a Spin-Off and the 50p SP was to facilitate such a deal/give existing shareholders shares in the new company plus pay-off the Bond.
If the European Fund is one of the above having invested heavily in the fundraise, they too would be an exiting shareholder in such a Spoin-Off of DX and would benefit from new shares/ownership too and hence the 40 day news blackout...our second not first.
Guys please stop squabbling amongst yourselves...open your eyes to what really could be going on.
All the above companies are invested in Levicepts.
Look at the Board of Levicepts....Elliott Foster is CEO and was only brought in at the back end of last year...WHY HIM???? and look who he reports to/sits next to/talks to...
Irena Melnikova, Ph.D. is a Partner at Pfizer Ventures.
Francesco is a co-founder and Partner at Medicxi.
Raj Parekh is a General Partner at Advent.
Arthur Franken is a General Partner at Gilde Healthcare
https://www.levicept.com/management-and-board
"Where is the proof AS does not like PIs..."
well he told me how disguted he was with some of them. He basically shut down the email connection to the company to protect the staff from abuse.
So there's that.
Oh and the destruction of the value of the company, (Which he is meant to work on behalf of all shareholders. It looks like the telegram group get better access because as a block they are bigger, so not really the same as all votes are equal.)
oh and ambiguous statements. Which can easily be intepreted different ways.
If he "liked" PI's he would have recognised his slips of timelines and in future statements could have been more explicit for the more hard of hearing.
His view I imagine, is more of a "I don't care, I never forced them to buy this stock, and its a rough game."
But what do I know?
Whether or not he likes PI's, I don't think he cares about them/us at all...not even a bit... or what has happened to their wealth when hanging on his every word.
There has to be more than 1 offer for avacta when one actually comes.
That alone will ensure a lowball doesn't fly
Where is the proof AS does not like PIs...
Any vote by shareholders is 1 man 1 vote so a PI with 10 shares has just as much sway as an II with 10,000,000.
Day to day trading does benefit the company financially regardless who does it. Only shareholder based fundraisers actually put a few quid in the companies bank. Most fundraisers rely on a few IIs to come up with the big bucks. Due to rather tiresome, long winded and expensive drug development costs and obligatory trial companies like Avacta need to raise shed loads as the R&D costs grow over an extended timeframe. Due to this, it is important to hold onto/nurture the II investors. This does not mean PIs are not liked.
Anyone investing in Avacta or other similar companies at this stage or earlier should realise how the need to raise funds works and that it would be over years not weeks. Don't blame others for your lack of research/understanding.
Flip, I meant that AS could "recommend" it. And then tried to show that PI's may not be as adverse to it as some are on here.
My point being AS saying that he knows what they have and PI's getting a piece of it, could easily be mutually exclusive.
I don’t follow some of your points Windy.
You say “AS could approve a buy out at 130p” and “ The PI are not part of the equation”
AS may recommend an offer of buyout but it will have to be put to a vote of shareholders - we own the company and most certainly are part of the equation.
Windy number 1 that’s not how pharma takeovers work. Number 2 it’s what the board recommends and number 3 if a low takeover is accepted that’s the risk you take while investing, nothing I can do to change that so why worry in the meantime.
Ice, I agree. FDA approval would/should get the show back on the road.
However your mantra of FDA approval being the only thing that matters to you is not the point. (I think you know that too, but for reasons I don't know but can only guess at, you refuse to engage with. Maybe the hole you have dug is to deep to climb out of...)
Anyway, say a bid goes in tomorrow at 90p and settles around there or even up to 200p, pick a (reasonable) number, way ahead of any potential FDA. Takes all the risk away for shareholders on timings, of approvals, future trials, of cash runway etc etc. For a lot of people they will multi bag. I think that would go through.
There will have been a huge churn in this stock over the last few years, with some banking profit on the way down, but many more cutting their losses. The more you have new(er) shareholders, the more likely they are to have bought in lower down and will see almost any offer price as a profit. (And may be less emotionally tied to the stock as that bond usually develops and strengthens over time)
I don't know what the breakdown is but the PI base might not be as hell bent as you are on seeing it to your conclusion.
So your view of FDA approval that answers and solves all problems may never come to pass.
That's why the SP matters at all times, that's why buying in at the right time matters. Your at best simplistic, one option, view that the world will work to your time table is a pretty risky strategy. (Holding that view for 5 minutes or 5 years does not decrease the risk, by the way).
My mantra here has long been "its not about the science, its about the money" was to engender conversation given what AVCT are trying to do, but truly, its only ever about the money.
PI's are just fodder for these companies to keep the lights on. Its not about us, its about the big players. AS could approve a buy out at 130p, and get a new fantastic pay plan and options with the new owner. Why would he care? Whatever happens if the tech is successful he will become immensely rich. The PI may or may not, but for sure, we are not part of the equation. We may get lucky, who knows, but that's what it will be.
Stodgy for cfo, you’ve got my 10 votes
I want smith and Gardner out .
Agree ,all three must go.
Oh, he’s lovely. I found it charming when he described PIs as liquidity. That’s his view of the majority owners of his business. That’s plenty ammunition to call for his head. It’s obvious his goals aren’t fully aligned. As long as he’s banking his whopper of a salary and his mate Tony is chucking options his way, then all is rosy from his perspective.
I’d like to see him stripped of all options. If he wants some back then he can cash them in at £50. Keep him in a cupboard as a board advisor if you must but get the naive buffoon away from decision making and spouting vacuous superlatives and pathetically inaccurate timelines.
Now for a bit of balance, he’s got AVA6k in the clinic. He was opportunistic in the covid raise to achieve that. Frustrating at the time but the right thing. Congrats. I can’t say the latest raise was the right thing - he left it to the last minute and over looked available retail cash previously - because we’re just here for exit liquidity. My 70p top up could have been at over a quid straight in their bank account, but he preferred 50p from funds that will make their cash and be gone within a year.
In the same way that others have moved on as the company has matured, it’s now his turn. Thanks Alan, best of luck for the future.
Thanks DTW. I’m looking forward not back, therefore is the question do we have a commercial team in place to maximise value for shareholders? I would like to add if we are genuinely standing on the verge of a potential paradigm shift in the treatment of many cancers from the moral standpoint do we have the deal making team in place to ensure multiple deals are agreed with big pharma to ensure as many treatments as possible can be made available to as many patients as possible as quickly as possible. The answer simply is what team? If Alastair was lacking in commercial experience then he could have built a comprehensive and experienced team around him. I believe we are talking about deals eventually worth billions of dollars. Given the data is providing proof of concept we need an experienced ceo and board who can work together to build the experienced commercial teams required. That is why I believe we need the change that I am told will happen next week.