Member Info for hunkymonkey

All of your points are valid, and I'm waiting for the trading update to seek clarification on some of the points raised.

One thing to note though, is that trac own the data. So when something is shipped, you have the sender, the port and the recipient.

You need to stop thinking SaaS as monthly revs, and more so individual trips - let's say $5 per trip, as the product is free (quite palatable)

So one trip = €15 for the 3 entities, but tetis is reusable, so the next 3 weeks they'll do the same. So one tetis generates €60pm approx

So the question I want answering is, what is the break even point per unit

As a ballpark let's say it's $200 per unit cost. It would take approximately 3 months to offset the cost of one unit. But thereafter be pure profit.

So 5000 units = $1mln outlay and after 3 months it's offset, and thereafter produce $300k per month 90% profit

You then repeat and increase the units on the next cycle. They are looking at exponentially growing YoY. But on the next round the SaaS pymts are 600k pm and so on, ideally if the amount can increase each time too

After a year if you can do that every quarter it's $1.2mln per month

On top of that, it's trac that owns the data, so also nothing stopping them from selling the data to third parties not involved in the chain. Let's say, a company wants to know the wait time in Latin America port, we have x amount of containers which are currently waiting 6days = more revenue

This is a very ambitious move, it's a massive "move first" and grab as much market share as possible, which would be very difficult to wrestle from us, unless another company provided free and undercut SaaS, which would take some doing

I've just checked the accounts and the physical inventory in the last accounts was $1,900,000. So that's not a bad starting point, but there's nothing to indicate whether they are tetis or not. But it would be sensible to get that stock out then get producing as much as possible in the meantime.

When I spoke to the BoD about scaling up for the new orders in the rns, that had been done during lockdown, so I don't know if inventories have increased since, but I got the feeling they were prepared for it

All in all it would be naive to say, the risk hasn't increased, it undoubtedly has, but..... So has the reward, this is a massive sea change and if you believe that they can get this done, then the revenues and profit would be sky high.

I'm all behind thus personally

A major player, and vying for a massive market share!

I'm fully aware no one can answer this definitely, but I was wondering when generally people think p1 data will land. Until then, the bb will be full of insults and I told you so.

Ultimately the same principles apply, it doesn't matter what a pharma may or may not pay. The market share of the drug and In turn it potential value annually is all that matters. For big pharma, there's an pretty much an unlimited budget, so if they pay $5bln, $10bln or even $20bln, that price will be set based on making their money back in 12-18months. They buy guarantees and in turn, buy money.

What they don't want to do is waste £1bln on a drug that isn't approved and risk failure, as that money is better serviced in their own clinical research.

Actually getting the ava through to approval is also the best outcome for shareholders too. I keep reading about a t.o is coming, I just don't see it - it's not the normal way of operating and I think it comes from people uncomfortable with their personal portfolio as a means of hope in the near term.

The reality is, there are near term catalysts (ava data), but ava progression/approval is the most likely way of recouping significant losses from here.

To a trader the sp doesn't matter, it's the range that matters, whether that is 20p-25p or £5-£5.50, but it did go from 17p - £2.80.

Strangely to investors, the sp shouldn't matter as much as inflection points, as if those critical milestones are the most important thing to ensure long term value.

Yet investors seem to obsess with take overs, it doesn't ring true. Both can make money asking the way, investors carry more risk, but are presented with longer term bigger gains

The reality in pharma globally there's hundreds of drugs, where varying people think that this drug is "the next big thing".

Investors and scientist get excited about pre clinical data, then extrapolate that out to global sales. In most public traded companies, investors believe their new drug is the one that a big pharma will snap up.

In reality (I won't say never) but rarely in trials are they. Why? Because when you look at the % chance of taking a drug from p1-approval is about 10%, therefore a 90% failure rate.

Now I'm not saying that about the ava side here at all, all the data thus far looks good, but from big pharma (and buyout) perspective it doesn't make sense. You'd be buying a 90% chance of failure depending at what stage you buy. I do acknowledge, as this is a wrap around it does increase the chance of approval. More commonly are milestone payments for royalties with larger association

So if you are a big pharma, it is cheaper to let the drug go through the trials, get approved and pay over the odds in a bidding war. That's cheaper than scooping up lots of drugs that won't get approved, on top of their own clinical trial drugs.

Im in the company of people who provide the medical equipment for clinical trials, and trust me, cash isn't a issue for these companies. They will pay though the nose to get specialist equipment a week earlier, so to put an extra bln on a drug that they can sell immediately is a drop in the ocean

I've seen so many messages from people saying t.o is coming, and it's so unlikely - it's almost a way of people trying to console themselves with their own pf, but it unhelpful generally. The prospects do look promising, but let's not hype the current situation, and certainly not a take over. Let's wait for the trial data from p1 and see where we're at, and stop all this nonsense talk of take overs.

There will be a bidding war upon approval. Cash isn't an issue for big pharma, they want something that works and is approved. If they need to pay $6bln, you can have that in cash. Let's wait for some official p1 data in humans first?

He said it would "be a tweak"

Hoping so, probably a coincidence, but nice £20k buy today too

There are lots of reasons, but they have been right so far. So there's now a lack of income (less than anticipated from 6 months ago), with progressing trials, is there increased cash burn, is there going to be a raise?

There's an old joke in the banking community, that when someone is looking for cash, the people negotiating excuse themselves to go the toilet and open a short. That's a joke of course, but a situation not beyond the realms, no one knows. But people like to say follow the money in a bullish market.

I don't know more than anyone else, it's a forum for discussion; however blaming shorters for the retrace and accusing them of trying to sabotage trials is beyond the realms

The only thing you smell is paranoia thinking that investment institutions are trying to get cancer treatments to fail and that anyone who disagrees with you is shorting. Wrong on all accounts.

Ava will bring the value, but look at story and stop blaming other factors that are little to do with it

So is that why the sp is depressed? No. It's dropped because AS over hyped and over promised lft sales "5mln sales per month". Now that's slowly coming off the mcap. The shorters discovered this and opened the short and have done well, who'd have thought that an investment firm gets it right and an average pi gets it wrong!

Are the shorters going to affect the cancer treatment efficacy? Safety? No, the end result will be the end result for patients? So rather than blaming shorters, look at the facts, look at the story, look at your own investment decisions

If you think AS is sat there trying to up up with ways to "burn shorters" I think you're well off the mark, he's focussed on progressing the trials on the ava front.

Fair enough, but honestly I'd look at why a share is nerve-wracking? Is it the fundamentals have changed? Jump in too early? Too late? Over invested? Not diversified enough? If the sp had been £1.50, would it still worry you? Would you sell? If the latter is no, then look at the former and decide how to correct for the next trade.

But honestly, if anyone is nervous about a share, is it based on fundamentals or decision making. But sp (on aim anyway) should not be a reason to be nervous.

Good luck, hope you hit your targets sooner rather than later

So if it has been up 5% it wouldn't have been worrying? It is a days trading. Lft value coming off, but it's being held up by ava value. Thank the lord it is, what would the sp be currently without ava!

Only problem is, ava value is a little time away, the market needs to find it's equilibrium where one offsets the other. If people have invested based purely on lft, sorry you lost (so far)

You've got 2 choices, hold for ava value, or sell and materialise the lft loss.

This is aim, these things happen. Good luck

I hear you! I was just thinking though, I wonder if the new website can't be released just yet because it's intrinsically lining to something in the trading update?

For example, let's say they wanted to use the DHL name on the website (or it was an important element) before the contract was signed?

So maybe within the trading update there's information on products that they want on the website, hence why it's not gone fully live.

Maybe that's why they've only done the container tracking element. Trying to offer a plausible explaination? Thoughts?

Think current investors and potential investors are waiting for the business update. Hopefully she positive news on deliveries from current contracts and potential new orders

AS job isn't to get the SP higher to make private investors feel better about their investments. His job is to guide the company through clinical trials to make a a product have blockbusting results ($1bln+ in revenue)

Sp shouldn't be a focus of the CEO, to I've read that, "they have to deliver shareholder value". In the he long term - yes, and that you I'll be achieved by the former.

Sp between inflection points only matters to traders, to investors any weakness is an opportunity to build on the long term prospects of what your research tells you

https://forbes.co.il/e/how-artificial-intelligence-will-change-the-world-of-digital-marketing-and-why-its-so-powerful/

https://www.facebook.com/128409500654527/posts/1496863833809080/

https://web-pick.com/testimonials/ (scroll down a bit to find him)

Just a bit of reading into shlomi, he originally started in Israel, which obviously makes sense. He seems to have worked in AI marketing and appears to be affiliated and appears in all of the above links to varying degrees.

I originally thought that he was like an intermediary to other companies. That doesn't quite fit with his background, it's AI marketing.

Don't really have an opinion yet, just wanted to find out a bit more about that he/they actually do

The BoD seem confident and I am now wondering if this AI marketing is starting to reach new blue chip calibre client. Rather than introductions, which is what I originally thought

Yes, that's exactly what my research said. In the same way of the affirmer don't work it's going to pretty much zero. Any glitch with the lft was always going to see a huge drop.

In the same way if the next lot of results come out positive, they'll be a spike, sentiment is likely to push the sp much higher than it should, then guess what, drop back.

Sentiment is not a rational reaction, more so an irrational reaction, whereas charts stick to a rational set of rules.

That's why having a balanced pf is absolutely key (and having a good entry)

Charts are pretty useless on aim all told, the market is more about sentiment (pre profit), look at the sentiment when the famous phrase "selling millions", and then the lft amendments.

Sentiment is in turn driven by news, that's the real catalyst. All the noise in-between is usually bored pi, b.s or ramping either way.

Research is king, usually because you can ignore all of the above