Member Info for beinthelead

Not. At. All.

But I’ve got a clear personality disorder so decided to.

Your wit is wasted on these idiots.

Equally mental is when he chooses to surface. And with what line.

It’s all premeditated. Full on loon. It would be a relief if he was paid to do it. At least there’d be an excuse for the weirdness.

Here’s another mentalist. Literally meaningless.

Eggy (Thornogson on here) is peddling that the improvement in patients is due to AVA6000 being p1ssed out without impact.

When AS literally stated that they WOULD NOT continue to deliver AVA6000 if it was inert and not therapeutically relevant.

What. A. Mentalist.

I’m utterly frustrated by the timelines AS continues to miss. Fuming. But the tech is extraordinary. These lunatics need to be blocked/banned/avoided.

That was PL’s summary I stole, as it was very good and measured.

But I’ll give my timeline;

Media stating improvements in quality of life - End of P1a. December 2023.

P1a data reviews and published, signalling a licence/deal - March 2024.

“We know we can't use ink sales data as a leading indicator as Alan still has plenty left. I imagine there's been a few exploratory discussions, but big pharma will wait for published results. I liked Alan's response regarding the lack of released PK data saying they needed to hold it back for peer review to make as large a splash as possible. I get the impression that publication will signal that their licence deal shop is open for business. Alongside it they can then sell the lack of side effects media story.”

Post AGM summary. Done.

Apre - you deserve a medal. Hats off sir.

Hanoi - why at times like this do people compare Avct development to AZN? It’s worlds apart. What is the basis of your timelines being not “way behind the pack”?

The timelines have all been given by Avacta. Timelines, via RNS we should hold them to. What else do we go on? Shasqi’s strategy was described as reckless. Why? Our strategy is not clear. Theirs is.

One things for sure; following some refection, that AGM was about putting a line in the sand and managing expectations. They have seriously good tech that they now know has immense value. They will not be rushed. This is going to take far more time than we’d been told.

AS stated in Feb that C5&6 WOULD be completed in H1. On paper and interview. He was asked the same question in the AGM and he snapped back to say ‘it’s impossible to say’. So, misleading in Feb. Clearly.

We’re all (some of us for a long time) in this for the same reason. AS has just rebaselined the investment case.

P1a was THE value inflection point. As in, what would deliver value to shareholders.

P1b is now THE value inflection point, which is 2 years away.

That’s not good enough to be just brushed away.

I do believe that matters will be taken out of his hands (a good thing) and we licence on P1a data release.

Neutronic - The LFT was good to go, in the packet. Stacked high. Deals were ‘imminent’. Multi-tens-of-millions in revenue. Next week. They why the SP was where it was.

We were told yesterday that we are just entering the commercial stage, and some way off hitting peak negotion territory. Ie, efficacy data. So to achieve those Tx numbers, we’re 18 months away, best ways.

Validation of higher valuations needs to come from an external purse. We are where we are. For longer than we are told.

Hope you’re well PL.

Agreed. He almost said they were ongoing, then pulled it straight back later on. Just frustrated as he continually hints at the goal posts moving, with no explanation or clarity.

Licence deal is the next inflection point. We wait.

Neutronic - that LFT opportunity was literally at his fingertips with a validated product. The opp certainly aligned to the valuation.

We’re much further away from that level of monetisation, so, in theory should be valued less. What’s not clear is what u serums the valuation, given Al’s commentary.

Is it P1a or is P1b?? It’s been P1a forever. This unlocks the platform and is the value inflection point. Now that, according to him, is P1b.

We all know that value has been created by this data to date. Who else has the tech to target and crack FAP!? Nobody. We do. It’s worth a fortune.

He was all over the place yesterday, hence the SP sits around this for hire until he resolves funding. Via licence or raise.

Hugely frustrating, but equally not surprising.

Good call Timster. Can certainly recommend it. You’ll benefit from it, no doubt.

PAH00 - good counter to my moodiness 😊. He certainly is.

Good debate mate.

Agreed PL.

Tripling the SP is only achievable via licensing so we’d both be happy, as that would be sustainable.

Anyway. Tis what it is ☺️

Correct Energy, hence my comments. He didn’t need to be as ‘honest’ with his answers. They weren’t required.

As you say, it’s all academic in the long term.

I think my view on AS was compounded by the confidence I now have in the rest of the bird. They were great.

PAH00 - fully agree the presentation delivered lots of useful info. Especially on;

- Director buying. EF did a great job.

- Dox is dox.

- clinicians can’t tell when they’re being dosed - Awesome.

- Greater than 50% CoS.

- Data rich set, and plan on peer reviewing.

Not so great, frankly awful;

- Valuation. Suicide on the back of last weeks placing rumour. He didn’t even answer the question.

- Efficacy not for at least 6 months into P1b, and slipped in we ‘shouldn’t read too much into P1a data

- Lauding the fact we’ve spent a tonne on Dx, yet comfortable the SP doesn’t get ahead of itself so we can gather investment.

The commercial strategy was good see. I do believe they’ll license the platform on completion on P1a. And AS SHOULD have led people down this path. Instead, he implied we’d not have strength in our negotiations until efficacy is apparent this time next year.

All over the place.

Phenomenal achievement. The tech is better than I’d imagined. The commercial direction is worse.

Bang on Energy.

I’d like to see EF given an opportunity to shine.

The investment is beyond safe. Someone will buy this. But AS did not deliver an astounding performance.

Timster - totally onboard with you waiting for the end goal. My research has always led me to underpin the science. That’s now been confirmed. Happy as a happy thing with the news today.

Less happy with ASs handling of the strategic questions. They were all over the place. At the start of C5, he knew C6 was required. He said that’d be done in 6 months. He’s now said he hasn’t a clue - they could know. Inflection point is now not P1a platform validation, it’s THE END of P1b.

Elliot Forster was electric. So good. In complete control and knew what the room wanted to hear. I’d like to hear more.

While my investment is ‘done’ here, timings and wobbly SP performance is far from over. Not helped by ASs performance.

Im sincerely hoping for a partner to be announced ASAP. Which I do believe will happen, despite that bleak ‘inflection point’ picture painted by AS.

This is a very fair assessment. That AGM has split the room in half ;

The science is proven via platform validation. The data they are seeing is world first stuff. They are seeing a remarkable improvement to patients during treatment. Our investment is ‘safe’.

The SP… it’ll what it’ll be. They’re not interested. Inflection points part way through P1b have been curtailed. P1a data will land when it lands.

The next inflection point will be how/when they fund P1b. Through licensing? Partnerships?

12 months is a realistic timeframe, based on that performance for when we see some true value attributed.

Morning PL. great update for eggy - bang on the money.

Nearly as good as todays update. Which is beyond stellar. I’ve previously discussed why the science behind that update is phenomenal. It’s truly world leading. Others have not been here before.

Rip/gang - beers soon, I think.