Member Info for beinthelead

Good summary.

I also feel a bit hungover. All of the hours of research validated, fully understanding the implication of the words in the RNS and interview. Huge weight off.

Feels a bit odd to kick back? But that’s what you do.

He’s mega annoying. Scripted? What d’ya mean? Next you’ll be saying that question at the top of that thread was scripted…

Nevertheless, AS was blinding in that interview. Best yet.

This was the same comment, almost word for word from our old friend Eggy on Twitter earlier today.

Read into that what you will.

After an RNS confirming there is tech available that is likely to result in upending cancer medication is the focus on how we’re going to have to wait for it!!?

Similar line they’re all using. Eggy back on Twitter spouting the same rubbish.

I’m interested to see the dose vs AE assessment. That’ll imply where they could go in terms of dosing. However, the biggie; that therapeutic dose existing in the TME at these doses is what we should be tracking.

The MoA should/I believe is the most effective delivery mechanism to date. Vs

Aldoxorubicin (serum albumin)
Doxil
Liposomal (generic)
Shasqi (intra t)

So exciting, whatever levels they move to.

BV - he can’t, that’s the problem. He never provides substance to his challenge on Twitter.

Ronny is a LTH with very critical insight. Always spins a negative.

It means exactly what it says. They are delivering ‘THERAPEUTIC’ levels of dox in the tumour.

Timster - spot on. This will take some time to sink in.

This has NEVER been done before. Validates POINT’s work. Literally 1st/best in class.

Defo truant. Scum.

Let’s keep bumping him back down. He’s done.

This is where we are now PL. make no mistake. Shasqi was our closest competition (Nobel prize tech!) and they fell short on Biopsy data.

We won’t see our 2023 IMO.

To add, RIP; exactly that. Fantastic update. Thanks for the support.

Excellent news all. Milestone day. This is the the most important thread… biopsies.

Thanks to all once again. This is VERY significant. We’ve grown up.

Exactly. They know more than us (me certainly). It’ll January soon enough.

You raise a good point re Conifer. AS has implied that they’re close. Used very familiar language in the past. They’re still on board… have t left. Great sign. Often missed.

These mental suggestions and overt excuses from Bella are becoming legendary. The answer is always more simple than it seems.

Timster/energy/Rip - once again nailing it.

Bella - are you serious? These kind of excuses are as bad as the trolls quite frankly.

AS has the data. He had it before he promised an update literally a week into the future. I’m not going to attack him here, been there. If you’ve been here a while it’s more than expected.

We do what we do best here - wait.

For balance; agree that the real money comes from a sustained financial model, I.e. licensing or TO. This is AIM, the market always has a cash burden hanging over it.

I think that will change should data be compelling enough.

Luke - I’ve studied an awful lot.

My conclusion; they’re all different until there’s a comparison. Why do you think some companies get bought by big pharma? Because they’re different.

FAP comparisons are sought to add value to cracking an elusive problem.

There’s nothing wrong with you adding context and challenge here, the angle comes across self indulgent rather than helpful.

Luke - yes, I’m open to debate. Miserable some would say.

Triggering immune response COULD come from AVA tech. Intratumoral injection is not new. There’s lots of published data on this. Its application is limited, therefore market smaller. Much more complex.

Not a valid comparison for me.

I get your point around valuation and hopes of ‘£20 next week’. What I don’t get is the need to challenge the validity of whether or not it’s £2 or £5 next week?

AVA tech has never, ever been cracked before. It’s adaptable, malleable, licenceable, scaleable… those you mention above are ****tails that present drugs in a very specific and difficult way.

Oh, and the valuation will take into account the proving of one (major) part of their immuno jewel - TMAC.

“You’ve all got a comparison until it’s torn apart.”

They haven’t though, that’s the point. It’s always “there are lots of examples…” but they never present them.

I’m more than happy to see both sides of the argument. But underpin your point with the actual examples in the context of your challenge. It helps.