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.
I have to admit, my finger has wavered over the sell button a couple of times in recent months with ABDX but I have reminded myself of the reasons I bought back in about a year ago. Basically, there is a bigger picture with Abingdon that has to be appreciated. This RNS is a very welcome piece in putting together that bigger picture.
The future for LFT's and related products is going to be huge (forget the Covid hype . . . that is over). ABDX seem to be positioning themselves for key roles in the roll out of LFT testing for a wide range of conditions that will keep people out of Health Centres; saving enormous amounts of money for the NHS here and Health Ministries the world over. Plus the provision of immediate testing possibilities 'in the field' where no doctors' surgeries exist.
I won't suggest that there will not be more bumps along the way but each piece that adds to the bigger picture (today's RNS, Muck's reminders about Salistick etc) gives me a little more reassurance to keep my finger off the trigger . . . I'm staying in (huge paper loss at the moment) and will top up when funds allow. All IMO, GLA the sensible folks.
". . . given there’s a general acceptance AVA6000 is already on the home run.".
Complete and utter nonsense. General acceptance according to whom? Who? You and a couple of other eejits? Why are you making up childish lies?
IMO and I believe the sensible majority on this BB and the very sensible totality of the Avacta Group . . . think AVA6K is barely out of the starting blocks.
Jeez . . . you FUDsters and trolls are just an embarrassment.
BV, stop the charade. You were a self-important clown when you were posting as Mr A, you were a nasty, vindictive, self-important clown when you were posting as NDN . . . jeez, get over yourself or get help.
And knock it off with the other IDs you use too. Just childish and boring.
I guess some people have enormous nads, others just have enormous egos and mouths.
You "quote" WB but that is clearly just made up lies . . . listen to the man himself on the link from RAH which I bumped on the previous thread. He, himslef, says the opposite of what you have just said he says. You cannot both be right about what WB said . . . my money is on WB.
Every time you open your mouth you put your foot in it. Which is why you are widely (universally?) regarded as having zero credibility.
Bump . . .
Doc, I was taken by your balsy approach to how much you thought it was appropriate to invest. Not for everyone of course. But then I was duly underwhelmed by Touks predictable cliche . . . "dont invest more than you can afford to lose". I have only heard that nugget a few thousand times . . .
Credit and thanks to RAH for posting the link this morning at 07.46, on this thread, which is what I am bumping. I am not advising or encouraging anyone to take on more risk than they are "comfortable" with but . . . Warren and Charlie make a persuasive case for growing a humungous pair when you think you have discovered a Prince Among Shares (my paraphrase). I may not be Warren or Charlie but I am balls deep in Avacta . . . and happy to be so.
Folks, have a listen . . . it beats the sh.1t out of listening to the transparent FUDders and the nappy-filling Mummies Boys, and make your own minds up. I repeat, I am not encouraging anyone to take risks that they think may hurt them . . . but after listening to the brief video clip I was reassured that my pro-risk approach to Avacta is justified. But then, . . . I do have enormous nads.
https://twitter.com/rah00084/status/1626487900228517888?s=46&t=wYytWv0lz_isBhpaGWzGYA
Thank you Ginge, . . . a thoughtful, informed post which, at least to me, supports the notion that the actual nitty-gritty science is too complex and it's implications too nuanced, to easily pigeon hole, in bite size chunks for the general public. (I include myself in that group). Perhaps why SD has been planned for so long.
Those who keep crowing that they haven't been told enough are too dim to realise that the protocols around such a scientific endeavour (technical, ethical, commercial etc) preclude shouting 'news' from the rooftops or even slipping cheeky little appetizer snippets into contrived RNS's. They don't understand the basic rules around conducting trials/business with integrity; because they lack it themselves. They are intellectual lightweights with broken moral compasses.
And you mentioned,
"As with all of this type of post there is a complete lack of knowledge and understanding. The suggestion of scientific literacy is to try and create validity for the post and poster. This was indeed the MO of NDN."
. . . and who should immediately try to shout you down . . . but NDN him/herself, in one of it's many guises.
Thank again, you nailed it.
Yes BITL, it still posts . . . quite frequently . . . but it's pretty much the same post, again and again.
I think it's an illness. Repetitive Post Syndrome (RPS) I think it's called. There's a lot of it about apparently. Four or five on this BB alone have come down with it. Quite badly . . .
Derek, you are doing it again . . .
" . . . but why not give us numbers."
That is what Science Day is for . . . you effwit. Do you really think they will announce, before Science Day, the data they say they will announce on Science Day . . . just because a few nappy filling PIs cant hold it in any longer?
Discuss the potential ramifications, if you must, . . . it is a free BB after all. But stop bleating on (and you Son of Thornog the Dong) about not having sight of the data we have been told we will have sight of on Science Day . . . jeezus wept . . . .