Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. 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.
I am content to wait until we have optimised our test which I don’t expect until towards the end of next week. However, I am surprised that we have no news on manufacturing deals by now. These will need to be in place very soon to meet expected demand.
Who mentioned selling ?? The name of the game is buy buy buy but not till the 90s
@Kaysee For what its worth, you have no need to explain yourself to me or anyone else. You are entitled to share your opinion here as much as the next guy/girl.
I didn't take your contribution to be anything other than a very solid and worthwhile opinion. These boards should be about debating everything about a company, not just what we want to individually hear.
From the how is diagnostic test performance measured video dated 23rd June ;
"as soon as we reach agreement with the manufacturing partners, we'll be able to provide more detail on the precise timeline for having product available."
From the IG interview dated 2nd July ;
"that prototype now works"
"we in the process of optimising that to get it be as sensitive as we possibly can and that'll just take a couple of weeks"
"and we are expecting to sign up manufacturing partners, very very soon."
For those that have followed the detail, AVCT have always talked about requiring multiple manufacturing partners to satisfy the expected demand.
All of that wording is associated with a company that is bringing a product to market that requires those multiple manufacturers. It is not associated with a company that is hopeful or seeing something in its prototype's performance, that leaves too much room for doubt.
Being the pragmatic chap that he is, Dr Smith would not say very very soon, if it wasn't true or in order to somehow prolong the big secret, that the test doesn't work.
Yes clinical validation is needed to establish exact performance but despite that, the process of bringing a product to market is very much in full swing. So one should ask oneself, why they are so confident.
BBNow, I may have seemed contrasting to your post however I did not mean to be. I agree with what you said, however was just bolstering with additional, what I felt, positive views on other variables.
I agree also that we don’t have any real threats from Sona, or even elsewhere, as long as we get our product to market, given the sheer scale of the requirement.
I am very positive for Avacta, and believe we will have an excellent product, news on the progress of which hopefully next week. I take your point re: impatience. You are right there too... I do feel at times that Alistairs presentations and Interviews unintentionally set expectations too high when it comes to schedule... but that’s down to my interpretation which admittedly is impatient (or optimistic?).
I do think we are singing from the same hymn sheet wrt Avacta and where we believe it is headed.
Is the boot on the other foot now? Only a few days ago you wrote....The gamble of loosing a few K or the chance of making 10s to hundreds of thousands is a no brainer. Sellout and risk missing out, not the best strategy
Poor old boot has sold out. He hasn’t got the patience sadly. Any more scaredy cats out there?
See you all at 90p as I’ll be buy a few more
@Kaysee I agree wholeheartedly on the complications, considerations and dangers of comparison and I would like to highlight that my "bar has been set to date" comments was in reference to the general principle of a rapid antigen test, being that Sona are effectively the only other company that is as advanced as AVCT, in this quest.
I personally see no threat to AVCT from Sona simply because the market is potentially too big for both of them put together and this is supported by the clearly co-operative approach Sona, Cytiva and AVCT have demonstrated in the Labroots webinar.
The analysis of Sona for me is because it is the best template we have for the path that AVCT will follow.
Where I do not agree is on the "news ASAP to settle our concerns." That for me is a sign of impatience. AVCT could not have done more to educate and keep their investors informed throughout this process and I see that policy continuing as things develop.
As the Sona process demonstrates, be it they made errors with their sample choices early on, these things take time, even when shaving off/running in parallel, a considerable number of the processes involved.
I am clear on what is key here.
1. The delivery of a test that is suitable for mass screening.
2. That when it hits each of its targeted markets, the demand will be there in sufficient quantities.
Right now No. 2 is very much there and for me will be for the foreseeable future. I am as certain as I can be that No. 1 will also be achieved.
All the time that this process is developing, along with the BAMS tests and for me the pending Covid therapeutics deal, time ticks by and we get closer and closer to AVCT going into the clinic with AVA6000.
According to the 2019 Annual Report ;
"Avacta has nearly completed IND-enabling studies and plans to file regulatory submission in the UK shortly (late Q2 or early Q3) to allow dosing of first patients with AVA6000 later in the year, or early 2021 depending on patient recruitment."
"Initial data are expected within a few months of starting the trial." (See page 23)
"If the pre-clinical performance of this drug is recapitulated in humans, then not only will AVA6000 have the potential to become a proprietary blockbuster in its own right, but the potential of the preCISION platform to improve the safety of a range of chemotherapies will have been demonstrated."
"The planned phase I study of AVA6000 prodoxorubicin in cancer patients is transformational for the Group."
Every day that ticks by, that trial gets closer.
The story around the AVCT Covid tests is highly likely not going to recede prior to the build up and deliver of that trial.
That trial is not alone, given AVCT now have £50m in the bank to exploit their platforms.
For me the longer this year runs, the more layers to the AVCT will be demonstrated. So I have no need for news flow to steady my nerves.
People are now starting to realise that any substantial news is weeks away, prob 6-7. Both AVCT and ODX have got placing away and therefore there is no need to keep investors onside/informed with RNSs, interviews, podcasts etc etc. Both need a min of one months worth of data for validation and that’s if everything goes smoothly. I’d expect these companies to go a lot lower than placing price which will be of little interest/consequence to the companies. They have your money and until they need more we’ll be in the dark
@chimers, haha kinda walked into that one didn't I !
as long as it's not the Fosbury flop!
I remember Bob Beaman’s jump, it just seemed to go on and on, fantastic. I wonder though if Dick Fosbury’s high jump also at the 1968 Mexico Olympics might be an equally suitable metaphor for the soon to be revealed AVCT test? Radical, higher, better, the new standard?
GLA
There are other variables to compare that make a huge impact, it isn’t only about specificity and sensitivity. Two other variables for example are effectivity of the test, and cost of the product, which play a massive part!
Nasal swabs are extremely uncomfortable, and not reliable, even when administered by a professional, let alone the general public! So the 96/96 for me is not a benchmark that we must meet or exceed (albeit that would be amazing!). Anyone can spit in a cup! Therefore the effectivity of our test is greater. Notwithstanding Sona’s test is not yet clinically validated, would you rather have a 96/96 test that works 70% of the time, or a 90/95 test that works 95% of the time? And that’s assuming we don’t match or better Sonas product!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8387113/amp/DIY-swab-tests-dont-deep-nose-accurate-sample-experts-warn.html
Then of course cost, given we are expected to be cheaper this also makes a huge difference, especially when selling to poorer countries.
If our test is easier to use, more reliable and cheaper, then the 96/96 is not the benchmark we have to meet to overtake Sona’s test!
Other variables too such as distribution and ability to manufacture, which I believe Avacta to be ahead of Sona even now.
We do however need news ASAP to settle our concerns.
GLA
Bob Beaman ?
Sounds like the same wavelength Ophidian.
All the best.
A young Black American long jumper also jumped over 29 feet (no one had ever jumped over 28 feet let alone 29) and he set a standard that wasn't bettered for 23 years.........
Thanks to BBN for clarifying where the bar is set for sensitivity and specificity.
Reminded me of the 1968 Olympics, which I realise is a while ago for most on here. A young high jumper came along and changed high jumping forever. By my reckoning, what AS means by best in class is that we will have something that will change testing forever.
Each to our own opinion of course. This is a buy and hold for me before the bar goes up and the world sees a new approach to testing.
All the best.