Member Info for BuenaVista

And we're back to where we were last Friday close.

Yes, like a cheaper manufacturing method; a new formulation to give a different PK profile (slow, controlled or delayed release, better absorption, different route of administration, etc); a new indication (not a different cancer, which will be covered in the original patent, but a novel, previously unthought of, unrelated indication); or enhanced efficacy due to combination with another drug.

I can't see how any of these would apply to AVA6000 as the cost gain on a new manufacturing process would be absolutely minimal - it really doesn't come much easier for any drug than joining doxorubicin to 5140! - and the next two don't apply. Combination therapies will either be claimed in the original patent to provide maximum IP coverage or are obvious and hence not patentable unless there was a surprising, unexpected synergy effect such as a combination with an appetite suppressant that enhanced efficacy (rather than reducing the desire to eat and hence reducing GI side effects).

Here are details of the AXA Framlington Health fund - https://www.hl.co.uk/funds/fund-discounts,-prices--and--factsheets/search-results/a/axa-framlington-health-class-z-accumulation - Fund size £590m, 46 holdings (mainly big pharma companies), average £12.8m per holding.

and the AXA Framlington Biotech fund - https://www.hl.co.uk/funds/fund-discounts,-prices--and--factsheets/search-results/a/axa-framlington-biotech-class-z-accumulation - Fund size £423m, 50 holdings (mostly medium sized and small biopharma companies), average £8.5m per holding.

The 2,336,248 shares acquired by AXA IM cost £1.67m which is approx 0.4% of the latter fund's value. A nominal amount at a bargain price or just dipping their toe in the water? Anyway, they will be monitoring performance and will keep, increase or sell their holding as they deem best.

Well that's AS for you. Always ready to smother a pig with lipstick.

Yes gje306, but the if and likely conditions in your comment aside, further approved indications for AVA6000 are only a few years down the line (a bird in the hand) whereas the same for new pre|CISON substrates are many years down the line (two in the bush).

News from the US indicates there's unlikely to be rate cuts any time soon. All tech stocks without income that rely on external funding have unsurprisingly been hit.

Is £50,000 for more than 60 weeks' work fair compensation?

AVA6000 will be off patent in 2035. If it isn't partnered for indications other than STS soon, in combination therapies as well as monotherapies, then given the time needed to get through clinical developement it will be a wasting asset.

Well the 2,336,248 shares acquired by AXA Investment Managers UK Ltd between the previous listing on the Fidelity site and 31 March 2024 represents 4.56% of the Placing Shares (for IIs) placed on 28/29 February.

As this is the largest and only share number increase in the top five shareholders listed on the Fidelity site as of 31 March 2024, I would hazard a guess that these shares were bought for the AXA Framlington Biotech and/or Health funds, which are two respected funds with long investment records. Not as good as the Polar Capital Biotechnology fund, but may be in future if they stick with the Avacta shares...

Thank you craig

I also heard him sasying that NYsize but a deal now to develop AVA6000 in combination with a big player's marketted cyctotoxins* could see combination therapies on the market in a few years vs many years for a combination therapy using a different (new) pre|CISION substrate.

* AVA6000 may not be so active against cancers such as breast, ovarian, pancreatic (all very big value markets) but it does destroy the stroma that protects the cancers from invasion by the marketted cytotoxins thus potentially increasing the efficacy of those cytotoxins.

Yesterday, HurstBot generated one of its random, unqualified statements: "Interesting to see AXA and Baillie Gifford on the shareholder list." If that is indeed true, then both of these companies have health funds and only Baillie Gifford has previously been listed. Unfortunately there was no printout along with the statement so where the data came from, if other than a shortcircuit, we may never know.

There are two types of (European) specialist healthcare funds: those that nurture and bring on small 'healthcare' companies; and those that just buy and sell shares in 'healthcare' companies. The former usually demand influence, such as a seat on the board, for their input and support. Maybe we'll hear about that after the 40 day embargo is lifted. The latter trade according to their view of each company, its management, its prospects, the sector and the market. My belief is that AS has got his brightest lipstick out for the latter.

Exactly notrex.

Bill Love co-founded Destiny Pharma (and is actually co-inventor of the company's lead platform - AS is not an inventor) and was CEO for many years but is now CSO with Chris Tovey (formerly the successful COO of GW Pharmaceuticals for several years) now the CEO.

Notable also that the CFO had prior pharma industry experience. TG does not.

https://www.destinypharma.com/about-us/board-of-directors/

There are many common mid FAP cancers that AVA6000 could be used against in a combination therapy. And there are many cytotoxins that could be used with AVA6000 in those combination therapies. Avacta is never going to tackle any of those possibilities alone so there are many, many licensing options there to get the ball rolling with a 'small' BP buy-in deal or two, BP endorsement and FOMO. But no, AS is holding out for the one big deal. Via another fundraise or few and a lot of inflection points, value curves and future glazing no doubt.

How many questions were there? There were supposedly going to be 10 from the TG group. Didn't seem many more than 10, if that. Can't remember whether my question was asked because I posed it so long ago I've forgotten what it was and the whole thing was cunningly set up so that we had no record of what we'd asked. As a former website designer, I can say it is blindingly simple to add coding so that the sender receives a copy but they chose not to do that.

He was alright talking about the data from the trial. It was when he got onto the future that everyone except the diehards thought "Oh yeah?"

There is clearly a credibility gap there. We've heard projections of what the future will be like so many times. Just go back to the old presentations.

Not sure why you've got hands free here baabaaraa. Shouldn't you be driving your Porsche in your armchair? Brummm Brummm

@notrex, OK, you're speaking for everyone because... because what? Because you have an overinflated opinion of yourself? OK, I get it.

@notrex, you say they'd have to put it to shareholders, I say they wouldn't recommend it to shareholders. Do you see the difference?

They aren't