Member Info for allah4uk

"Respiratory testing" is just a PCR test that checks for respiratory viruses.

"Professor Bell said the devices, that are 'no larger than a teacup', plug into a socket in the wall and process swabs within an hour."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8647635/Rapid-pregnancy-style-tests-Covid-19-eat-cornflakes-sold-5.html

Doesn't sound very rapid to me, also I don't think it's the type of product you guys are working on - but I could be wrong.

If used at home, the Avacta test could be used like the antibody tests right now : as "orientation" tools ; which eventually require PCR testing. (Hence, rather complementary instead of acting as a complete replacement).

Otherwise this test will have to be undertaken in front of some authority (police agent, nurse, bumper, etc.), to show you're a totally honest citizen, and that negative-result spit was totally yours !

As Quickdraw mentions airports, let us remind that there are several markets for testing, with different requirements.

Airports, hospitals, and other large strategic assets prioritise accuracy.
The general publics, and the events they may attend, will put a premium on speed.

Horses for courses. Both PCR and quick (e.g. lateral flow) tests will have their share of the pie.

@hants : Bruv, the product pitched by Avacta should be very successful thanks to its convenience, assuming it holds its promises in terms of accuracy.

However there are a few parameters that people enamoured with that share, which is perfect on paper, don't seem to take much into account :^)

Off the top of my head, I can think of the following factors which could rain on your parade :

1) Production capacity
If you can't scale up properly, you can't make as much money as your market projections led you to hope.
I believe a non-trivial number of OEMs are tied by contracts to make PCR tests. That's production capability you can't make use of. (And that's assuming working capital won't be an issue either).

2) Existing contracts for PCR tests
They can cover multiple months of production. You can't snap up that market share anymore.

3) Market entry timing
Avacta will be entering the corona test field pretty late.
Your biggest competitor won't even be PCR tests at this point... but vaccines. Good luck with that.
All the testing business will suffer from the mere announcements of semi-successful Phase III. Remember that many millions of doses have already bought in advance by governments. Most people will (wrongly) picture receiving their free dose and enjoy a normal life straight away.
But, at least, Novacyt has already secured millions in the bank. We're pretty chill.
(That's admittedly less an issue for you than for GDR, the poor guys).

4) Pricing
The wholesale price per unit of a PCR test is much less than 15£.
Sure you have to add other costs, notably that of a lab technician. However, quicker, high-throughput PCR saliva tests are now available. I believe the final bill is competitive with Avacta's projected prices.

By self-administered tests, I had in mind the lateral-flow ones. Like pregnancy tests.
Fits the 10 min. description.

Spitting in a tube does facilitate the testing process, however the actual processing of the spit sample isn't done by you , so I wouldn't describe it as "self-administered".

At any rate, reading "all the logistics of that takes time" followed with "we are (...) testing now", I can't help but connect the dots as Graham would say. This fits the Near-Patient Testing trial that should have been wrapped up by now.

And again, there is zero doubt that *several* saliva tests are being evaluated, and will prolly be ordered. Avacta won't have the full pie for themselves, that's for sure. As for us, we stand a good chance to receive orders. Not a done deal, but we're certainly competitive.

Yeah Balanced, the "Some of them" is pretty unambiguous : the saliva-based test pie will be shared amongst several companies.

The common denominator, and really the most important point here, is that the Bri'ish gubmint has most definitely moved on to saliva tests. Saliva has become the new standard.

Dunno if the AVCT guys think the entire money will flow towards their product and only theirs... but if that's the case, and your quote of Hancoque is exact, then they're in for a rude awakening.
I mean they'll make money - just not as much as they hoped.

Balanced, from your quote I understand that ALL the "new" tests on trial are saliva-based, and amongst them there are point-of-care/self-administered ones.

In this context, "don’t need a lab on the test which means you don’t have to send it off and get it back" is ambiguous. My first interpretation was that Hancoque was thinking about self-administered tests ; not mobile tests, which still requires a lab of sorts (instrument + technician).

Then again, a 1h-long mobile test does fit the "don’t have to send it off and get it back" bill, somehow.

Like, seriously, some people need to get real. They ain't fit for investing, much less on small caps.

johnny19 this RNS was dropped in the afternoon, which is exactly when the SP started to rise.

It's all much ado aboot nuffin, zo, so it'll fall again rapidly in the absence of proper news.

Even the single screening option should beef up the SP.

Now if we take a step back.

There were 4 billion air travel journeys weltwide in 2018 : https://www.iata.org/contentassets/a686ff624550453e8bf0c9b3f7f0ab26/wats-2019-mediakit.pdf

Traffic reduction for end of 2020 & early 2021 expected to be in the -40% ~ -50% ballpark : https://www.icao.int/sustainability/Documents/COVID-19/ICAO_Coronavirus_Econ_Impact.pdf

So for the next 6 months, from normally 1bn pax down to 500m pax.
That's counting both internal & international flights. I won't search for the average breakdown cuz it's gettin' real late, but let's assume it's 50/50. That brings us to 250m pax to be potentially tested on intl flights between September 2020 and January 2021.

Let's then say that only 1/4 of the countries require such a test, that's 63m pax to be tested. At least once (testing policies will vary wildly).

Dunno bout you bruvs, but that's a reasonably big pie to get a share of, if you ask me.

The only saliva-related development I can think of, is that of a quick, home-based test.
But that doesn't come without difficulties : https://www.researchgate.net/post/Why_we_have_to_dilute_saliva_with_buffer_in_the_use_of_lateral_flow_assay

As per the last RNS, the antibody test won't be released before October at the earliest, which sounds realistic. I'm betting on somewhere November.

Also, as per the Brücker RNS about their multiplex test, I think NCYT's upcoming multiplex test will be two-genes based.
Because :
1) They've already had to develop that for the French market
2) They won't want to release two versions of this new multiplex test

Bruv, our saliva-qualified test has long been available on the market.

WHY DO YOU WRITE IN CAPS ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Inch'Allah !

Good find bruv. For a 30 min result, it's likely to be a LAMP test.

But if I were you I'd definitely avoid to lump NCYT with Optigene without much precautions.
Might be an educated guess, but a guess nonetheless. Only a confirmation through an RNS can be considered hallal.

"(Projected)"

WHY DO YOU WRITE IN CAPS ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

I don't want to bash VanV cos he's almost as precious as the NHS, but it seems like his source was mistaken.

Or perhaps, the optimists will say, the RNS was withdrawn at the last minute because a giga contract is in the cards.

Same here, I'll be looking forward to reading more standard tropes from you.
Have a good week-end.