Member Info for AVCT

My contention was that if they meant P1 in it's entirety - then Q2 appeared to me unlikely

Fact is we're all waiting for what ever deal is brokered off the back of P1b, whenever that deal arrives

No rush Ben

"full Phase 1 data is scheduled for Q2 according to the milestone slides. "

I read that as P1a using a fairly normal meaning of "full"

Could you give a few examples of precedent please Ben

Thanks in advance

Oops

"GSK are shooting for a 2025 takeover of £40bn and are currently priced @ mv of £60bn on a vigourous takeover double that to say £120m ie 3 x sales"

Takeover should of course be turnover

"Human or AI the below is accurate 👇

https://open.substack.com/pub/icecool/p/ava6103-a-multi-billion-dollar-preclinical?r=58tk8w&utm_medium=ios .......-if you disagree, present a counterargument with evidence to say otherwise. "

Keeping in mind what we are talking about are takeover value estimations for the company as a whole a number of years into the future - I was looking at a reality check comparison with GSK

GSK are shooting for a 2025 takeover of £40bn and are currently priced @ mv of £60bn on a vigourous takeover double that to say £120m ie 3 x sales

Simplifyinging a current pipeline of 3 drugs averaging sales of $4bn each gives an equivalent future take over value target of £18bn and a clear path milestone by milestone how that would be achieved from the current 50p 👍😊

"Of course I think on balance its worth more than the current market valuation, but it is imo impossible even to assess a ball park figure given the range of options....So I am cautiously optimistic but if some one offered 500m right now I would take 150p per share."

So on that basis wyn what risk adjusted overall return do you target for high risk investments like this with such poor prognosis on your metrics ?

"Thats why I found the talk of this multi, multi billion valuation spurious to say the least."

But you don't actually believe that do you - based on what you said previously:

"Because the data that is constantly thrown off seems solid. P1a notwithstanding the extra cohorts, has continually confirmed the safety and at face value good signs in some case of efficacy too. All the noises made in interviews with the AVCT people is of confident expectations. The pipeline and pre clinical results look as ever, good, if not spectacularly good."

"Because the data that is constantly thrown off seems solid. P1a notwithstanding the extra cohorts, has continually confirmed the safety and at face value good signs in some case of efficacy too. All the noises made in interviews with the AVCT people is of confident expectations. The pipeline and pre clinical results look as ever, good, if not spectacularly good."

I take that to mean that you agree there is a case for long term value to prevail

As I agree that AVCT is festooned with red flags of various sizes

Timeline however is a red flag rather than a third leg to this imaginery stool

To use a footballing analogy I would suggest the score is 1 - 1 at half time rather than the 2- 1 that you try and infer

Why do you say

"...whilst at the same time the valuation part of the equation seems more likely than ever to arrive, ..." ?

Some investors are able to hold two figures ( and the different factors that drive each ) in their minds at the same time, share price on one hand and potential value on the other

Therein lies the investment opportunity for those who see it and have the money and patience to act on it

...and your point is ?

QED

As you say, we don't know NPV ergo you cannot know the NPV multiplier

In any case how is NPV calculated? - primarily from peak sales ( which we all have our own opinions on )

We both agree that if/when BP put a price on our assets it's likely to be rather large

Your arguement would probably be assisted Ice, if you included the actual NPV and multiplirrs for the Kelun and original Enhertu deals

Not sure how you can say Enhertu trades at 5-7 x peak sales, as so far as I'm aware it doesn't trade as a single entity

Ps 5 x 3bn = $ 15Bn anyway - which puts everyone in the same ballpark, which is all we can hope for at the moment

If you're suggestion is "AI" says i'm right

Believe that if you want - I prefer my own research and own views

"Pharmaceutical companies typically apply a 5-10x multiple to preclinical assets based on precedent transactions.

• Low Case Valuation: $4.5B × 5 = $22.5 billion

• High Case Valuation: $6.8B × 10 = $34 billion

Final Takeaways

• Even under conservative conditions, AVA6103’s preclinical valuation is between $22.5B – $34B."

I think you're a bit muddled here Ice - my understanding is that the x5 multiplier is one typically applied to peak sales not NPV

• The only reason AVA6103 hasn’t been sold yet is that Avacta is waiting for human data to maximize its valuation."

Again I disagree - imo reason not sold is because it is rightly not for sale

Why you in such a paddy Go Sushi - you and Ice appear to be in the same ballpark re: 6103 current NPV

It's a reasonably big ball park, as these things are, but both begin with $B

It's common knowledge

You need to read the original issue documents fron 2022

Thought you meant Financial institutions

We've all seen the medical trials sites

"we’ve got validation from world class institutions"

Who do you have in mind Ice ?

"The single biggest (and constant) flaw in your assessment given you believe its what BP will pay, is why they have not already bought it given you believe the data already available makes this an already proven technology"

Could well be because it's not for sale.