Member Info for 13thmonkey

BV perhaps they know they won't need them?

Dennis, Laurie or Grant?

It will literally be bot driven/drivel.

Midnight, so lartruvo (sp?) That didn't work, for just STS picked up 20% market share that was worth 300mn. So a 1.5bn market for just STS. That's what I'm seeing.

I've literally posted their note in another thread

Are they? Why? What do they get out of it? A little more commission on the way up and down? They don't hold enough stock on a share like this to warrant selling it high and buying in again lower. Not worth it for the risk.

Now a group of people who want to convince more to buy, then sell at a peak and buy back in, they have a lot to gain and little to lose.

That's not research is it? That's just then aggregating other views, probably delayed, so numis may not be included yet. There is not actual research and opinion from Barclays.

This is Google image to text conversion and not my opinion.

numis I RESPONSE

2 November 20231 06:00 GMT

Avacta

Spinning a few too many plates

Avacta operates a hybrid business model. On the one hand, it is an early-stage therapeutics business with two discovery platforms and a broad but early-stage pipeline. On the other, it is a diagnostics business pursuing an M&A strategy to achieve global scale. In this note we highlight various concerns over the opportunity for AVA6000 and the quality of data thus far, and also explore the logic for building a diagnostics business when the company's track record with instrumentation in analytics and veterinary health has been disappointing. We think the market is over-confident in both the opportunity and chance of success of AVA6000, and is overly bullish on the prospects in diagnostics. We initiate coverage with a sell rating with more data on AVA6000 needed to reconsider our views.

⚫ Mixed track record: Avacta was first listed in 2006 and over this time

frame has explored opportunities in analytics and animal health. The former was sold having struggled to deliver meaningful revenues and the latter was discontinued for similar reasons. The company has since significantly strengthened its board of directors and has begun to focus on therapeutics and diagnostics.

Deeper dive on therapeutics: In this note we take a closer look at Avacta's

lead clinical asset (AVA6000) and its two therapeutic discovery platforms (prelCISION and Affimers). The logic behind AVA6000 is sensible, directly targeting the widely used chemotherapy doxorubicin to a protein found in tumours and other fibrotic tissues. However, more targeted drugs already exist. We also note a broad range of later-stage drugs targeting soft tissue sarcoma and believe the opportunity for AVA600 is more limited than the company and the market believe.

• Increasing capital requirements: To pursue M&A in diagnostics and

accelerate R&D in therapeutics Avacta will need to align different investor groups and/or strategic partners with very different levels of risk/appetite. We believe that this will be challenging and struggle to see Avacta raising sufficient capital to support both businesses.

. Valuation: While we are cautious on AVA6000, we still assign a 40%

chance of success, with the drug achieving a 12% share of an increasingly

competitive blockbuster market. We assume the company signs a

licensing deal that covers the cost of mid/late stage trials and earns

a future 20% royalty on sales. We include a terminal value to include

potential follow-on programmes. We blend this with a 3x EV/Sales on

Diagnostics and weight our valuation heavily towards a base case. Our

price target of 70p per share implies 45% downside.

Healthcare & Life Sciences

For FCA purposes this is a Marketing Communication

SELL

Target price 70p

I've only seen a screen shot will figure out where I can host it.

Their logic is 12% market share and 20% royalties on that, but that ends up with a pe ratio of about 5 as all that would be pure profit.

Janiax, well done for saying the same thing three times in the same thread.

You claim that this might be a pump and dump, who is pumping? They must be doing this publicly as there's no point just talking to themselves, so who are they? Where are they pumping it?

Why is 'mid' even a target why not just 'in' q4, which is far closer to what's actually been stated.

There is a point here, with straight dox at a concentration of say 1 unit, the amount of dox hitting that RA site would be proportional to the size of the area, so maybe 0.1% so 0.001 units. With 6k it would be much higher, both because the dose would be maybe 2.5 and not 1, and it would only be hitting the RA site and the Tumour. Assume that the tumour is expressing 10x more than the RA site and they are similar sizes then maybe 0.2 (ish) hitting the RA site.

This isn't great, BUT it'll still be better than straight dox for the heart, so you'll be alive, have an undamaged heart and worse RA. Maybe there is a way around it, immunosuppressants to downregulate FAP-A at the RA site, choosing patients for those with little/no RA (although a lot of RA might be better as each site would receive less), but this is still a better position to be in financially than either the straight dox market (more cycles, fewer contraindications (age, heart etc. )) and better for most patients.

Everyone here knows that drugs have been approved that only improve things for a small fraction of the population with a disease whilst having bad side effects, this is no different, except that it'll do that, likely for a (much) larger fraction and it'll not have the side effects, so this does not hurt our chances in the slightest.

The cohort doesn't need to be big enough in ph1, it's about tolerance and safety. It's not killing people left right and centre so it's good enough to move on to ph2.

If you had arthritis and cancer would you rather have treatment that gives you lots of side effects and damages the heart, or would you rather have something whose side effect is to damage the arthritic areas some more but nothing else significant.

However, as a side note, and not suggesting that this is likely, RA is an immune response, where the immune system attacks healthy cells, what happens if those healthy cells are killed off? Does the immune response lessen? MS patients (I know one who has been treated like this) have been treated with chemo to kill off the immune system so that it stops attacking the nerve sheath, and it works. Whilst this is the same same effect, stopping the response, by another means removing the target for the immune response could be beneficial. Anyway all of this is fantasy but it shows that it's not necessarily a bad thing.

Yuyu your view on the probability of the results of a match suggest a level of sophistication of thought that's frankly not that great.

But can I say thanks for exposing those thoughts so that I know to temper your words with that knowledge.

Precision in that case may mean something different, more akin to personalised medicine, ie gaining a precise understanding of the particulars of the disease that the patient has and tailoring something precisely for their disease.

Matml, it apparently matters because it wasn't invented here.

It could have been invented here, you could have asked, they could have said yes or no, but there's too much bickering, one-upmanship, talking about size buyers and NY opening, saying 'I'm an astronaut', never mind reams of tech analysis which really only applies in the absence of news, calling AS a liar, barely literate posters who don't know the difference between Million and Billion. But you need to have a coherent view to go to them and say we want to know more, we want more flavour. If this board wants to be taken seriously it needs moderating, and people that are here to solely talk the company down need to go, especially when most of what they say is 'wrong' is factually incorrect.

Someone else does something that will end up benefiting all, it reminds AS that we exist, and we can behave like adults, and the response here proves why they would not entertain talking to representation from this group.

You can hide behind 'it's banter' or 'It's another opinion', but that's all BS. There is the occasional nugget, but it's constantly hidden behind drivel.

In part this is the fault of LSE, and the lack of moderation mechanisms, but that's why other mechanisms exist, you might shout echo chamber (people have), but they want the same things those that shout that want, so what's the problem. Ditto the comments about 'a bunch of rampers' so what, they aren't, but if they were what's the problem, they aren't turning from ramp to deramp, so what's the problem with a group that is positive.

I won't trust that you called and/or emailed Avacta.

'Managed to obtain a copy' that's hilarious, i.e. they are in the group, that's all it took.

Nice shiny new account from someone.

You missed out

1. LSE un moderated disruption from certain members.