The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please 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:
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 think it’s important to have someone at the helm who thinks in hundreds of millions and billions, and doesn’t go weak at the knees when a few million is bandied about. if we end up having change then the board must ensure that a new management teams incentives are aligned with medium to long term performance. i don’t want pumpers and bull****ters, it has to be solid commercially based incentive plans, looking at deals and revenue.
there also needs to be safeguards in place to ensure we don’t all get sold down the river with some contrived share giveaway, again the responsibility of the board.
Genstar
What have I said that runs contrary to the facts?
TG is in cohort with the old boys and suits. He’s the reason for the death spiral finance. He lets the old boys join the party at their own price and takes advantage of long term holders.
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.
"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
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.
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!!!
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
"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.
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.
Good post Soleboy
Have to admit I'm torn regarding AS. On one hand, the AACR P1a/Q&A update was incredibly positive. The trial has undoubtedly been handled well and the latent value of the PRE/Cision platform is obvious for all to see. AS could be forgiven for believing that under his stewardship he has added significant value that will soon be realised.
On the other hand, are we judging AS simply on the SP? It is a key measure for sure but in the absence of a detailed explanation, we are left to assume that all the recent fundraising has been handled badly. Consensus amongst SH's clearly believes this to be true, however, we don't know the caveats imposed by Heights or the conditions imposed around the 50p raise. Would other AIM CEO's desperate for cash be looking enviously at AVCT? even at 50p?
Perhaps it is an unrealistic request but if the Co were equally willing to explain commercial strategy/fund raising as they are to explain scientific progress then this would perhaps go some way to allaying shareholder concerns and cool the social media rumour mill.
AS could be forgiven for feeling defensive and challenging SH's that whilst the SP is currently in the toilet, he has delivered on arguably far more important metrics. Fantastic trial progress, fully funded for at least 2 years, all IP assets 100% retained, two key appointments recently made to take the Co forward into the commercial phase.
In the hypothetical scenario that we were today sitting at ATH's, I would suggest that very few LTH's would be selling because they would fully understand that the potential for a BP takeout would be well in excess of ATH's and this only increases as the data accumulates .
Having said all that, I have to agree that the time for no questions asked, big salaries, option packages, first class tickets to London etc can no longer be funded by shareholders, the BOD has to start paying its own way and all remuneration as we enter the commercial phase has to be linked to Co performance and the SP.
“Jesus I am in a comedy club. here are a few more for you Ice. "Dont worry about funding", "Shareholder Value", "No Placing" "Raise unlikely at under £1" "Start of the value curve" "Start of commercialisation" "Lots want it" "Prefer non dilutive methods" "We dont know how to use a calulator but please take us seriously" "I have a lot riding on avacta as I have a lot of options (Plus my small 400k salary)"
What’s the above got to do with making cash on FDA approval of AVA6000. Making changes this late in the game won’t help anything.
Good, balanced post SoleBoy.
AS seems like a genuine, decent bloke but the disastrous raise has cost shareholders a lot of money. And the “optionality” and don’t worry about funding comment will haunt him forever. Many, including me, took those words at face value.
If he does go it will be a sad ending. But he has been well remunerated and has a shed load of options.
I don’t think he has the deal making experience to take us to the next commercial stage.
"Who says they are mistakes"
Jesus I am in a comedy club. here are a few more for you Ice. "Dont worry about funding", "Shareholder Value", "No Placing" "Raise unlikely at under £1" "Start of the value curve" "Start of commercialisation" "Lots want it" "Prefer non dilutive methods" "We dont know how to use a calulator but please take us seriously" "I have a lot riding on avacta as I have a lot of options (Plus my small 400k salary)"
As always no doubt in the science or the fact that AS is a great scientist regardless of what I think of him as a CEO its the reason I have not sold but the management team seems to be serverely lacking in my opinion but once again lets pretend everything is A OK and there does not need to be any accountability. Id like to start with why the feck our CFO either cant use a calculator or they are so disorganisaed they dont double check a RNS, pretty much everyone spotted that mistake as soon as they read it how did a company valued at 150m not? Rookie mistake, who is to say the next one is not the CFO signing away the company for £1.00 a share instead of £10.00 because he didnt count his zeros)
I would love AS and the team to prove me wrong and see true value for the company and make me eat my words as it would make me a very rich fella but I just dont see it under this leadership after 4 years and a lot of fluff.
Great post Soleboy
Start of Pre/Cision trial
Smith, Bell ,McClaughlin.
Didn’t see any mistakes through trial everything went well,but it’s now
Smith, Coughlin,Bennett
All this change at the top will affect SP and damage the company?
SP held up when Bell ,McClaughlin were dropped in one liners in RNS’s
Only damage has been car crash placing last few months.
Out the 5 of them only Smith keeps over promising.
Gardiner sitting in the background giving himself shares.
Let’s see what happens next week.
I’m hoping side ways move for Smith and Gardiner moved to Man City accounting team were he would fit in.