Member Info for HarChris

Well if Alastair truly believed that i'm sure he'd have sold his large holding over this past year since being ousted, yet he appears to still be holding all of them.

Anyone able to share the full article? It looks positive.

Well he said those comments at £1.30 a share almost two years ago so perhaps was right then. Different story today.

They've obviously been in a closed period in the run up to the full year results.

Not saying I expect to see any director purchases but this week would be the week if they were to purchase on the open market (assuming there's no imminent deal being worked).

Bailie Gifford has had an absolutely torrid time of it of late, their stock picking performance has been shocking yet I didn’t see you mention that once.

The early 2025 pours will have been enough to generate cash and probably support this recent far lower pour (if it's for a 2 month period) but it's properly touch and go with no room for error if so. Not ideal.

I'm still fully invested so obviously, like you, hoping they can hit this higher grade just in the nick of time which would transform the outlook here on a dime, but it's fast becoming a coin flip unfortunately.

Essentially need to keep their head above water until production increased... if so we'll see 2p at least this year but if not it's a restructuring and possibly dilution to death at a much lower price than today's 0.6p. GL to us both!

Although I do have to ask you Wyn, what are your thoughts on Lombard adding substantially as well as Conifer to both over 3%? You made a big song and dance about listening to the likes of Bailie Gifford so I assume this has rather piqued your interest? Interesting to think that they may well have been buying your shares this week.

I agree on the expecting a less than stellar pour but being kept in the dark / being given vague inconsistent information isn't helpful.

Even just a bit of extra context with that tweet, stating when it was and announcing it was the last of the low grade ore etc would at least be transparent and helpful.

It's still a bit lower than I'd have hoped for if it is over the entire nine/ten week period since last pour... but again we don't know.

I truly wondered if you'd take a step back from here after selling out as you somewhat implied yesterday but instead you're doubling down on presenting the doom and gloom narrative.

I don't agree with what you just said and I highlighted that Christina has been consistent in her discussion of when a deal could land. She didn't sugarcoat it last year hence the significant sell off after her comments in September, her words this time were different, less vague and subtly implied, unusually so, that non dilutive funding could be with us in the 'near term'.

As for: 'lets suppose, just for the sake of argument that nothing is in place.' , well I think it's a ridiculous suggestion given they have reached this stage without a raise. And large holders that were part of previous raises claim that there's been no scoping out of a raise as far as they know, and there's been no broker leaks etc so it really looks like no raise has been sought/attempted. I therefore cannot conclude that absolutely nothing is in being worked.

Whatever they are planning / working on might fall through and they are left with a panicked raise but planning/ working on something that certainly will be doing right now.

What is absolutely evident is that Christina and the board believe they will land non dilutive funding otherwise at least some sort of rights issue would have occurred by now, especially with the annual accounts being due. You just wouldn't go through all the rigmarole of getting accounts signed off without the 12 months of sufficient cash runway only to raise a few weeks later.

Does that guarantee non-dilutive funding in the coming months? Obviously not, nothing is guaranteed and it does seem likely Alastair assumed the same thing back in late 2023 but we've had a full eighteen months of operational progress from then so I remain hopeful that management will pull it off this time around.

I don't think there's any... could really do with an IMC / Q&A, it's been a while.

The thing is at any point in time we should be evaluating the value on offer and deciding whether to buy more, hold, or sell if already holding or to buy if on the sidelines. I can't see anyone actively praising the BOD currently, I don't think anyone think's they've done an amazing job of late or are truly deserving of their high remuneration. But at the same time your long post also sums up why many of us are continuing to buy or have entered recently, because essentially this is the same company as it was when you were ' thinking that a £40M Mcap prior to a JV with a Major was good value' , and actually much better placed because they are now actively in the middle of this phase 1 part of the JV... and so we see it as an amazing opportunity to accumulate shares at a fraction of the price that you first invested at.

You're probably right that investing with a long term view many years before Anglo were going to be on-site in Zambia wasn't the smartest decision, but I see very good value from a short and medium term view now.

What's even worse is not only did they hold off as long as possible they then put out a wishy washy tweet which we can take nothing from, besides the fact that they are still operating (or at least that's the implication). We assumed that anyway.

it's time for a detailed and clear update on what's going on. If production has been low then tell us and try to explain why that is about to change, but don't treat us like idiots.

If one were to say it’s more or less binary that at some point in the next three years this will be either zero or £5+ via a TO then that’s at least closer to the truth, and gives a much clearer view of the risk/reward today at 31p.

Spot on BV, in common parlance binary is suggestive of a coin toss, a 50/50 or close to 50/50 situation hence the chagrin to posters suddenly using it in this context. Many of the same people scoff at the mention of a £10 TO offer 12 months down the line, something that to most is unlikely but has a degree of possibility, too.

I’ve got no problem with the posters on here transparently desperate to see Avacta fail, it is what it is and you find it on every bb. It’s the faux balanced types that hide it that I find most tedious.

In your tiny mind everyone that ridicules you is pretentious/ ignorant rather than the common denominator being you.

It’s quite funny. I mean, everything can be reduced to two broad outcomes I suppose… today I will either stay alive or die. I will go to the cinema or I won’t, I will start a new business or I will continue in the job I have.

In that sense and in that sense alone funding for Avacta is binary.

Consistency is what matters so if you made a big fuss about BG selling then you should be alive to IIs now buying in / adding. There were many on here falling into this category.

Others that assume fund managers aren’t all that especially clued up should ignore this too.

Interested parties have access to the data before it’s made public in late 2025.

There is always 'a chance' of funding failing and administration beckoning but it's highly unlikely in Avacta's case, especially at this juncture. So much so the rest of us don't feel the need to discuss it alongside tons of other possible things that could technically happen and therefore have some probability attached but too low to warrant repeated commentary.

Realistically funding will come and it will be one of a few options. Yesterday was the most confident and somewhat definitive Christina sounded in terms of near term partnering options when she said 'more to come in the not too distant future' re licensing alongside numerous other quotes. And if not there will be a rights issue. You're betting on it being that and at a whopping discount to whatever your sell price was yesterday (31p?) and the rest of us are betting on it coming via other sources or, as we are seeing elsewhere, closer to market price with the shares taking off after it's sorted.

And whilst it's true that there is no evidence of any deal Christina is more transparent than many think. In September she made it clear that there was no near term deal to be done, not until further 1b data, whereas now she's talking about the relevant parties seeing the data as it comes through which will be tied to any deal. So there's consistency and it puts us right in 'dealmaking territory' in a way that wasn't true for any of September til about April.

And finally I'm still just as buoyed by Richard Hughes' appointment as I was last week.