Member Info for DonaldTrumpsWig

WYN says... its not about being right or wrong. I don't know what is going to happen. How many more times do I have to say that?

My guess, you will say it again about a million times along with:

'Unlike everyone else, I'm not emotionally attached to this share'...

and not to forget...

'my opinion or that of anyone on the BB will not move the share price'

or

'My detailed analysis of charts has led me to conclude that the SP can go up, go down, or remain unchanged'

Don't remind me Doctor, from memory we went from £1.70 ish to £1.10 in a couple of hours with everyone locked out, horrible watching helplessly as it tanked.
To those who might say, it could happen again, I'd say, we have to get to £1.70 first !!

Now we know what they wanted the £55 mil for? jeeez not even a box of quality street on the table or a free avacta biro !!

WYN, I can't work out whether you are pushing this bizarre reverse economic theory because a) you like the attention and it propagates your sealioning agenda, or b) you are as thick as mince...a bit of both I suspect

Try this,.. you and Mrs Wyndrum go for your weekly hol to Torremolinos, you are sat on the beach in your union jack shorts and gravy stained vest and a 'lucky lucky' man wanders up to sell you his plastic sunglasses.
He asks you for 5 euros but you know that his mate will be along shortly with exactly the same sunglasses and he's the fifth seller to approach you already with the same glasses.
In this scenario, you might offer him 2 euros to get rid of him , so yes, in this analogy, the buyer is forcing the price down BUT this is because you have a 'market' where unlimited (elastic) supply AND direct competition is available.
Neither of these scenarios apply to AVCT, supply is fixed at circa 263 million shares and nobody else owns the same unique IP/patented technology (no competition exists).
All 263 million shares are currently owned by someone, agreed? there are no more available, agreed? and if therefore buyers want them badly enough they will have to offer a price (generate demand) that persuades the owners to sell.
And when demand outstrips supply, price rises. When the reverse happens and supply outstrips demand then the sellers have to reduce the price to entice buyers

I will have one last go Richob, then is you still don’t get it, I will throw the towel in.
In my ‘ludicrous’ analogy I said it was a World Cup final at Wembley. Surely you must agree that this game can’t be compared with any other game.
Yes Burnley V Blackburn at Turf Moor is also a football match but in terms of demand they cannot be compared. Do you think that many England fans will say ‘oh that’s a shame, World Cup tickets sold out, let’s go up to east Lancs in the rain instead’
Likewise, shares in AVCT cannot be compared with shares in (for example) ODX. Yes both are companies in the diagnostics sector but they are entirely different in terms of their value, their IP, their science.
Do you genuinely think that AVCT and ODX are realistic alternatives to each other for investors money ? That they are competitors ?
Do you think that the acquisition teams at Roche and Pfizer will be looking at AVCT and ODX as competitors for their investment?
No they won’t. AVCT has unique value in its affimer and PreCision platforms. This science isn’t available elsewhere, it’s patented, it’s unique and today there are only 263 million shares available to buy, no more.

Yes we are all free to sell our shares in Avct and buy ODX or Tesla or bitcoin or Heinz baked beans but they are alternatives NOT competitors.

'If you think that 263 million is "perfectly inelastic" then I happily give up.
I won't bother with "no alternative" as there are obviously no other shares in any other companies
available for people to buy.'

Hi Richob, I certainly don't want to appear rude or condescending but 263 million shares in circulation actually IS perfectly inelastic. Think of it as tickets for a world cup final at Wembley. There are 100,000 tickets available max, supply is inelastic. Now if 500,000 people have applied for tickets then touts will make a fortune because demand outstrips supply and price rises.

AVCT shares in the market are a fixed number (263 mill) and this number cannot be changed without an authorised share issue which would have to be RNS'd. This happened recently as we all know, but the (new) number of shares in circulation is now fixed again.

With regards to alternatives, AVCT do not have any. The very principle of their work is that they have proprietary IP, in other words, their science is unique, this is why we are invested and this is what we believe to be is the true value of the company.

Anyway, apologies for boring everyone this aft, I'm now off for my tea !!

Richob

'So when supply doesn't remain constant (and increases) what happens?'

But that's the point, supply of AVCT shares is perfectly inelastic (constant) at any given point in time. And demand for shares in AVCT is perfectly binary and (Porters 5 forces) there is no viable alternative, substitute, competitor with the same science/IP as Avacta.
Yes, we are all able to make a decision that AVCT is not a good investment, sell our shares and buy biscuits instead, but this would be sellers dropping the price. If we all think AVCT is on the cusp of greatness then the reverse happens and buyers force the price up.

"Buyers increase competition within an industry by forcing down prices, bargaining for improved quality or more services, and playing competitors against one another."

I know I shouldn't feed the sealion and I'm sure this is boring the life out of everyone else but you really are making yourself look foolish WYN and you clearly don't know when it is time to give up.

Buyers only influence a market when there are alternatives, competition and substitutes etc. There are no alternatives to AVCT shares, buyers don't look at the SP of AVCT and say 'hmmmm they look expensive today?? I might buy shares in Clovis instead as they are dead cheap at the moment for some reason??' or maybe people like you do ??
Read up on Porters 5 forces, it's an economic theory that might help you to prevent from making a fool of yourself

Wrong WYN, supply of shares in AVCT is perfectly inelastic.
I can't be @rsed to look up the number but we have had an RNS stating the exact number of shares now in circulation including the 'options' our new investors are able to convert should they wish.
This number is absolute and can only be changed with a new share issue which would have to be RNS'd

Give it up WYN

I read economics at Uni, albeit many years ago, and unless my memory has completely deserted me, a very famous 18th century economist called Adam Smith (often referred to as the father of Economics) wrote extensively about supply and demand and stated:

'If supply remains constant and demand increases, prices will rise' - we know supply is inelastic, i.e. there are only a finite number of shares available, hence as more people seek to BUY shares then demand increases and the price rises.

Don't bother with a long response, I think Adam Smith is dead

Not directly linked to AVCT and the CANSEEK agreement but suggests how much more dynamic NASDAQ is compared to AIM. The quicker we are away from this grubby little, zero liquidity, manipulated market for chancers and gamblers the better

Also augurs well for the sort of deals available from suitors seeking to licence the AVA pipeline

Wonder whether it will be a Steve Jobs type presentation with big Al parading across a huge stage in front of a massive screen wearing a brand new shumper and cords combo....or more likely a fuzzy webinar with Al as a talking head in front of a portakabin-esque venetian blind backdrop.

Either way I would love to be there, probably competing with Peter Kaye for the hottest tickets of the autumn

Pressure mounting on government to find a solution that increases the speed and efficacy of cancer care.

26% of patients at The Royal Marsden waiting over target of 62 days for treatment. Steven McIntosh, of Macmillan Cancer Support said: "The NHS doesn't have the staff it needs to diagnose cancer, to deliver surgery and treatment, to provide care, support and rehabilitation."

Come on AVCT this is about much more than SP, this about a paradigm shift in the treatment of cancer.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-63573718

I have some sympathy Gruffell. Over the years I have had numerous (futile) rants at my bank about their prehistoric systems.
Only last week I had another argument about the fact that in order to take up my AVCT share allocation in my SIPP it required 5 working days to transfer cleared funds (that were already sitting cleared in another account of mine with the same bank)
I (not so) politely explained that I could withdraw cash from an ATM put it in an envelope stick a stamp on and get it to Australia quicker

Hi Apre

I'm with Barclays and like most, I've been notified of my allocation, yet the excess funds I deposited haven't yet been returned. I therefore, in the interests of expedience, transferred the equivalent funds from elsewhere to cover the top up.

I'm conscious that we could receive an update imminently (possibly intra-day) hence wanted to take advantage of the price softening over the last few days

I've just topped up with the funds I allocated for the excess application. £1.23 still represents incredible value IMO.
95p would've been better mind
Looking at this investment in a non-emotional manner and discarding daily fluctuations, it's difficult to envisage a scenario where the value of AVCT is going to reduce from £1.23 in the near to mid term.

WYN would go on to the shops website and write a seven page essay on the prevalence of fake Rembrandts and how it has been statistically proven that 4 in every 5 Rembrandts are fake
Before sneaking back into the shop and offering them £4

54 retire
I’d agree with all of those 4 points and would add:
5, the science is just too complex for most investors to understand
I have a network of friends, family, colleagues who have invested in AVCT who despite investing their hard earned cash have only a very limited understanding of the science.

Can't see the relatively small amount of shares (0.82% of existing holding from memory), having any significant effect on the SP even if all of them are traded.

Regardless of whether DE updates are available, I think it is highly unlikely there will be any market sensitive information RNS'd until the OO share issue is concluded.