Member Info for BuenaVista

@Andershow08, re "Is my understanding correct that when/if these patients reach 16 weeks treatment the disease control rate may move up to 85%+ (13 of 15 patients)?"

The data aren't totally clear to me because of the multiple counting, but I think that must be the correct interpretation.

I have no faith in the CEO or the CFO. Neither has pharma industry experience and it shows in the poor decisions the company makes and in timelines that are rarely if ever met, resulting in loss of credibility, running low on cash and the consequently tumbling share price. Every LTH who has similar concerns about the quality of Avacta's management needs to include a question about CEO and CFO resignations. If the management receive enough, and particularly if they are deluged with such questions, then they will not only be fully aware of PI feeling and but will have to respond. Won't they?

Brown envelopes?

TG clearly not the best qualified person to be Avacta's CFO. Not good for LTHs and not good for Avacta.

"Unless there’s a very good explanation for the circumstances surrounding the shocking raise then AS simply has to go- confidence and trust is shot. His position is untenable unless he has a very good reason why we weren’t to worry about funding to then deliver one of the worst raises I can recall"

If we were on Nasdaq, the vulture law firms would be circling the company, looking for disgruntled SHs wanting to sue.

Https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/precision-biosciences-announces-return-of-programs-and-conclusion-of-collaboration-with-prevail-therapeutics-47613652

I think you can see the process with AVA3996.

The substrate will need to be shown to be inert (not metabolised into something active) except for cleavage by FAP (and only FAP) and the leaving group wil need to be shown to be non-toxic. The warhead will also need to be shown to be substantially active only in the TME, and the more toxic the warhead, the more substantially it needs to be active only in the TME. If the warhead has not been through trials itself then its metabolites will need to be shown to not cause substantial side effects.

07 Jan 2021: License Agreement with POINT Biopharma Inc "The agreement provides POINT with an exclusive license to the pre|CISION technology for use in the first radiopharmaceutical prodrug the company intends to develop, and a non-exclusive license to the pre|CISION™ platform for the development of a broader pipeline of FAP-activated radiopharmaceuticals."

https://avacta.com/license-agreement-with-point-biopharma-inc/

A non-excusive license deal with Novartis to develop FAP-activated radiopharmaceuticals should surely be possible, given Novartis' interest in radiopharmaceuticals and their keen competition with Point/Lilly in that area. Would be a good way in for Novartis to test the water, although I think they, like any company, can look at pre|CISION in detail in their own labs, just can't publish or commercialise anything without an agreement with Avacta.

https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/point-breaks-open-phase-3-data-showing-how-drug-14b-lilly-buyout-saga-matches-pluvicto

That was "Agreed" to "If it's validation that BP is looking for then this could come in a few forms"

Agreed

@gje,

Pharma companies are very conservative. Unsurprising when the huge sums of money and the companies's (and the CEOs') futures are at stake. Decisions are taken very carefully when it comes to new drug classes, new mechanisms of action. There is a definite 'After you' culture until commerciability is proven and then the 'Me too' culture kicks in and takes over and it's a very strong-willed CEO who can resist piling in along with the rest (like with Novartis not joining the ADC beanfeast: https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/jpm24-cancer-players-jump-head-first-adc-field-novartis-ceo-explains-how-hes-resisted ).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Me-too_drug

I believe Avacta need a deal or two with BP, such as a non-exclusive licence to use pre|CISION with a company's specifically named oncology class of drugs. Backend-load the deal(s) with milestone and royalty payments and once one signs up the others will (mostly) all say "Me too!"

So is AS looking for the big deal to commercialise pre|CISION or is he looking for the big deal as a takeover (uncomplicated by annoying little deals that might tread on the toes of the buyer) and a nice job for himself in the new set up? Remember, no one - not AS, not MM, not the sealion, who I now see has joined in as a green box, nor anyone on here - has your best interests at heart. A buy out at a large premium on a heavily discounted share price wouldn't matter to AS as long as his future was secured. That's life. It's just the way of the world.

When is commecialisation though? This year? Next year? AS hanging on for the big deal. Pharma can wait because no one is commercialising this if Avacta is going it alone. Avacta doesn't have the resources - cash, staff, skills - to go it alone and pharma knows that. Pharma can wait until Avacta are desperate for cash again. Science good, management bad and needs replacing with pharma-savvy leaders.

Investor webinar https://www.turnerpope.com/investor-evenings/webinars/ response to question @29:30:

"We've got sufficient data now to partner the pre|CISION platform. ... Clinical data is absolutely key to deals and deal value. We've now got very clear, irrefutable clinical evidence that the platform selectively targets a warhead to the tumour tissues, etc, etc.

"A couple of things are critical to us in the commercial partnering process. One is continuing to build that body of [positive data, as just described]. The second is to be in a strong negotiating position with a long cash runway which we also now have. In terms of strategy, we want to retain as much as we can right now because we know how valuable the pre|CISION platform is, so doing small quick deals is not attractive nor sensible. So care needs to be taken right now to do the right deals, with the right partners obviously, otherwise we actually risk reducing the value of the commercial opportunities. For example, we don't want to do deals that cut across our own pipeline strategy ... and we don't want to do small deals, which are easy to do of course but you could carve out a portion of what a large pharmaceutical partner of the right calibre might be interested in."

So he's saying "Unless you're prepared to offer us a massive deal we're not interested."

I miss the old AS, who might have said something like "We're exploring all avenues but will be guided by obtaining the maximum longterm value from the platform." Ambiguous, but would have kept potential partners, traders and shorters on their toes.

AS has effectively trashed the SP by declaring that there will be no deals at all for months and months and months. Not even a little one to keep the lights on beyond April next year, to get the ball rolling, to induce FOMO in BP. Is the long wait for THE BIG DEAL the true strategy or it an excuse because there hasn't been any serious interest yet for any licensing deal for any aspect of pre|CISION? Do we trust AS's word? The company needs professional, savvy leadership. Are we facing an offer of 60p at a 50% premium and cushy roles for Avacta management in the new organisation?

@Bella's "Does " don't worry about funding" seem like a true statement. "

Yes, in the sense that "Only two owners" is a true statement when each owned half of the car.

What are the FAP levels like in paediatrics? Given that FAP is associated with tissue remodelling.

@WeAreGroot, I wasn't able to see the original Xcrement as the poster has blocked me or not added me to the list of admirers but I know it can only be one of the pom pom girls. So, what research do you think I should have done? Maybe enquire on here as to what it was about?

So... in what way did I slam the poster's Xcrement as 'lies'? I'll let others decide who looks like an idiot and I'll take your apology as a given.

It looks like an Xcrement from one of the pom pom girls.

What's the primary source?

Trolls only plague companies that will come good. As you say Nanomat, they exploit the volatility to prey on weak holders.

So JWBellamy can't name any "rampers that were here above £1 are no longer here".

Please ignore this trader troll. It has nothing to contribute about Avacta. It just smears its excrement here.