Proposed Directors of Tirupati Graphite explain why they have requisitioned an GM. Watch the video here.
There's a lot of conjecture there... I expect in 6 months someone will be saying 'why isn't this something you take all the time, we were told it would be' waaaaah. Along with asking for data they won't understand.
Would you take a contract in another currency without knowing the exchange rate or the cost of living? It's the same thing, unless you have the wider context of what a number means items irrelevant.
Get it?
Remember the minimum bar for this is the same level of dox in the tumour (I'd suggest that's a therapeutic level), and lower side effects. If we achieve that then we are better than dox, have access to a bigger market than dox and will be cheaper to treat with than dox.
The three comments of therapeutic levels no cardio toxicity and marked reduction in side effects means we have reached that bar. It is very difficult to interpret that otherwise.
Knowing how much better is irrelevant for us mortals, is 10% extra dox a lot? Is 100% extra too much and wasteful, I've no idea. But being able to put the same amount into the tumour and being able say, go play golf tomorrow, no need to be in bed all day on pain killers. That's the key message. If the answer was 5, what would that mean? Is 5 good? Is it a lot better than 3 a lot worse than 10, unless this is your field it means nothing.
One could get a complex about threads going missing, there's a massive rabbit hole to go down.
Sorry misunderstanding.
Nope not me, and £15 isn't enough for me.
I'm not sure what you read RAH, I can understand how those numbers can be achieved, I can see the logic, but I can also see that people who don't see that logic could view them as being fanciful, I'm not sure what your problem is with that. There is nothing in any of my posts that can be viewed as negative.
So that had the mcap at $6 as being on the order of $300mn? So a nice factor of 15x.
5-8bn I see as being for ava6000 as a minimum price. How much would some one pay to dominate the use of doxyrubicin, no one else will want anything but the targeted low side effect version. Currently 1.5bn per year, but constrained by side effects. So that will increase, hence that's the baseline.
As to then having access to the rest of the prodrugs, I'd say minimum of 50% on top, probably more like twice as much again, so each of the 11 other pro drugs world only be worth 0.2x ava6000. Which will be bargain, and is conservative.
Then there's everything else ..
So I see 7.5bn to 24bn expanding on your 5-8bn, that lower value is bottom estimates for everything.
Does it seem fanciful, yes, can you tell me why? I doubt it.
Here's the simple view:
Drug companies do not need sales at the point of an offer.
Offers can be for multiples of estimated future sales (the onus is then on buyer to get it into the market and selling).
So there can be a value £V attributed to a drug that some buyer thinks has a good enough chance of success to be worthwhile buying, for several reasons, one of which might be to stop someone else owning it, or to extend the the use of a drug upon which it is based.
A platform can enable many drugs, there are I believe a dozen planned for, all of which operate on the same principle, take a current known, understood drug that targets cancers that have a particular characteristic and make it target that cancer more accurately. That's the platform.
Logically the value of the platform must be >£V, ideally the sum of all V's from 1 to 12 + some factor for 13+ that have not been identified yet, but more realistically some multiple that creates good value for the buyer and is sufficient for the seller. But it must be greater than V.
How much greater? no idea. But many V's are set by one buyer, a platform could attract many which will naturally increase V, and many V's are set before sales, and before 100% proof is obtained. Proof in this case is simpler to come by as it's a known drug, and we are just getting it to the target.
Beyond this there are other tracks that Avacta are working on, that in the future may hold great value, so that's another addition to V, but again this would probably get wrapped up in some multiple.
I await an honest response.
Marked reduction =/= completely removed. The RNS is gospel until we hear otherwise.
I'm am 100% sure that this is significantly (<10% of the negative consequences) better than current treatment with Dox. But you know someone will say 'it's not worked as well as you said' when 1 person gets a little hair loss.
Just to stop the rumours, and people saying that it wasn't as good as was stated (you know how a single sentence that is just one persons opinion/interpretation becomes fact and a missed target in some peoples eyes) , the only side effect that was noted as not being present was the cardiotoxicity. Everything else is 'well tolerated'.
For my risk management the first part i'd be conservative on and read it as insufficient cardiotoxicity to impact the treatment, and the second i'd read in a similar way, side effects are low enough that they don't impact the treatment. I'm expecting that I'm being a little to risk averse. but that's fine, i'd like to be pleasantly surprised.
From the RNS
"AVA6000 continues to be well tolerated by patients in cohort 4 with a marked reduction in the incidence and severity of the typical toxicities associated with the standard doxorubicin chemotherapy administration. Typical toxicities include alopecia, myelosuppression, nausea, vomiting, mucositis and cardiotoxicity. Importantly, even at the highest dosing levels in cohort 4, equivalent to more than double the normal dose of doxorubicin, the typical drug-related cardiotoxicity of doxorubicin was not observed."
Being involved in this in any way will only increase risk to Avacta.
I thought he had to sell everything as a part of his bid to get isreali citizenship? They are I believe only allowed to hold investments in isreali companies?
That was 8 years ago, so it lends nothing to the argument in my opinion, but I still think 5bn is a low ball offer for Avacta or significant portions of it.
Thanks dude, I had no freaking idea what was going on. Just remember to get out early on the slightest rise, you know just in case it's a part of some kind of death spiral, don't get trapped in here. You can thank me later (when I will be giving no ****s).
I think there's another optimum, no idea what the number is, but let's say doubling it (or any other large increase), that tells the market that they are confident enough in the current levels of side effects that they know they can dump a lot more into the body. And that's also a massive show of confidence and shows how focused it is. I think a medium sized increase would be less confidence inducing.
Precision in that context typically means customised to the patient - tumour combination. Perhaps genetically.
Thank F for that.
Who says we won't be, we are not invited so there is no time sensitivity, we won't be double booked. Love the 'owners of the company' line btw, very funny, very up yourself.