Member Info for B_A_B_A

This is an IgG antibody test. We launched something similar in September, it’s in the recent RNS. There are many similar tests already out there I believe.

Also need not forget that an acquisition is not a unilateral action - so even if one is or had been intended it would never entirely be within the gift of the company to successfully complete it.

Agree with everything you’ve said there Porky9, and would expect your revenue estimate to be pretty closed maybe within +/-5%

Didn’t the market close at 12:30? How can it close blue?

LAMP is still lab based, so competition for PCR not LFT.

The company would have to announce the extension by RNS as soon as it becomes aware that it is to go ahead. The value will be within a range that makes this mandatory in my understanding.

The letter that the Twitter post refers to explains that the hospital intend to compare a new test against the existing lab based test. I assume that our involvement relates to the latter - eg. we will do the lab test with our PCR assay. There might be some possibility that the new test is ours also, possibly our LAMP test, but that isn’t expected to be ready until next year as far as I understand - so more likely to be a new test from others that will be measured against our PCR?

That would indeed be less of a surprise to me than a nova developed LFT suddenly appearing from nowhere. I’d expect that there would be better value/ more realistically attainable acquisitions than Avacta’s test though, such as the test that BRH owns the rights to. Avacta has much more going on than just the COVID LFT and would be way beyond our affordability (and in addition, the Avacta test is as speculative now as its ever been in terms of whether it’ll ever materialise..)

Not sure what you mean by what is going on, but I believe that they are making and selling lots of tests of various types and for various purposes.

The RNS was clear about what R&D activity was ongoing and in the pipeline. There is no LFT antigen test being developed or planned to be developed. There would be absolutely no reason to hide the fact we’re it to be true - it’s not as if an antigen LFT would be a first. Just Twitter ramp tactics again IMO. I firmly believe that Novacyt considers LFT not to be an appropriately accurate technology for virus diagnosis and that is why it hasn’t and IMO will not be developing one.

Unless the claim of lack of availability is to be used as a justification for the mass deployment of LFT, ELISA etc, ie. we had to, PCR suppliers couldn’t meet our requirement (so it’s not our fault...)

No problem for me on HL. Quoted immediately for 1000 at just under 885

We really shouldn’t be surprised. The UK government strategy is almost exclusively centred around LFT, whether for care workers, care homes, NHS staff, schools mass testing or community mass testing. The govt is fully bought in to LFT and not even the deluge of coverage identifying these tests as suboptimal is going to change that.

Isn’t shouting about it on social media a little bit low rent for a company like Novacyt though? I like the way that the company uses social media; mainly general industry related comment and coverage with company PR when appropriate - such as when we release new tests etc. This is a very professional, very well established and in recent times, very successful business. Novacyt just needs to carry on exactly as it has been for the last several months IMO.

I think you’ve misunderstood me? There is nothing bad here, quite the opposite in fact. I’m entirely happy with the company and what it is doing and have no desire for unnecessary updates. It’s the person to whom I was responding who felt otherwise. I did okay from avacta, sold out at the right time.

We know exactly what is going on. The company is making, and selling, tests to be used for the diagnosis of COVID-19. What else is there to know?

We are not developing a COVID 19 lft test. We are developing an antibody lft test.

Our LFT is for antibody testing.

Plus 1.9 million volume in France.

Am I missing something; the contract says awarded to Queen Mary University of London?