Ben Richardson, CEO at SulNOx, confident they can cost-effectively decarbonise commercial shipping. Watch the video here.
Haha Thorn you are in your element today.
1. We are fully funded, with clear milestones in place.
2. You have interlocked share price and sentiment with company success. Which is not the case.
3. You don’t have a clue what commercial discussions are taking place.
Anyone that takes you seriously shouldn’t be investing in AIM. You certainly don’t hide your agenda that’s for sure. 👍
What’s the rush on deals anyways, we are fully funded going into the pivotal efficacy stage of human trials. We all need to think logically, the more positive data we have available the better the deals we will get longer term. Short term share volatility is only relevant if you are trading or need to sell up, it doesn’t reflect the success the company is going to get if the FDA approves AVA6000. 💯👍
Not long to wait, until these are released. As the 2w trials will be done in parallel with one another rather than sequential, we will get results pretty soon. As the criteria for selection is strict and designed for success. We will likely see more evidence of efficacy data. Lot’s of news flow due in the next several months. Well funded, moving in the correct direction. Sentiment imo is why we are still at the placing price. (50% discount from our magnet price of 100 for 19-20% dilution). Sentiment can easily turn overnight and what better way to achieve that, than keep proving the platform works. FDA approved oncology drugs are worth a fortune, many multiples of our current mkt cap alone. Exciting summer ahead imo. 😊👍💯
Found it interesting Dr Smith mentioned real world evidence on the Q&A presentation, doing some research on this topic and you have an entire section on this subject by the FDA.
https://www.fda.gov/science-research/science-and-research-special-topics/real-world-evidence
You can go down the rabbit hole few pdf documents to read, however it’s clear Avacta and the FDA are working together to generate real data, to back up the case for approval.
Bring it back on topic then you muppet, seriously BV you love to comment stay on the sidelines answer windy and thorn when you see fit, yet you refuse to keep me filtered, why is that? If you don’t like what I post bin me simple solution… 🤣💯👍
Do you think Avacta will run out of money before they get FDA approval?
Sorry to blow your bubble, however we are well funded moving into a pivotal trial and commercialisation 2026. The FDA will approve AVA6000 once they are ready, as i said previously on AVA6000 approval, this will open up serious commercial opportunities. So windy I assume that because you are focussing on the money aspect you can’t actually give me an answer on why the FDA will fail this based on the science. Totally blowing your arguments out of the water, because if you believe the FDA will approve on the science everything else will come good eventually.
I’m talking about the odds of failure. FDA approval for any Oncology drug, solves loads of problems regarding commercialisation that’s true for any pharmaceutical company. So if the odds of success are greater than failure for FDA approval, and AVA6000 gets approved everything else will fall into place.
“I do think the odds on failure are greater that success but thats based on stats. (And also backed up be a seemingly never ending SP decline as the trial progresses.)”
Oh windy more BS…..
The FDA don’t care about general stats of previous drug approvals or money or even share price. We are talking about AVA6000. Put a case together for the FDA not approving AVA6000. I’m talking about FDA approval only. Nothing to do with commercialisation. Let’s concentrate on the FDA approval millstone only from a scientific perspective. The floor is yours 👍👍
Bella the problem is non researched punters were expecting the December data to hit the mainstream media causing the general public to wade into Avacta like the huff post article on the LFT. That would have been easy profits, instead they were on the end of a 50p raise for the long term strategy of the company. They don’t care about long term strategy, hence why some people are pi55ed.
Ah forgot about this FUD angle, how do you explain the tumour reduction in the case studies then on the 3 week study? it clearly works as intended? The bar to replace current dox is so low that the data generated so far already looks compelling, the 2 week study is awesome because they are not seeing any major toxicity, it would be unethical not to pursue this arrangement, as it could improve the efficacy even further than already provisionally established. Especially with cumulative doses of AVA6000 over a long period of time on sensitive tumours to Dox. Still not seeing any convincing scientific argument for the trial failing based on the current data that’s been presented. Come on Thorn and Windy present the case for failure based on the science? Not just some half assed BS.
“The faith you have that success is higher than likely failure is only based on what AVCT have told you”
Can’t fake independent scientific data. Do some research, maybe you will come back to the same conclusions as most well researched posters on this BB. Very simple question for you. AVA6000 releases Dox directly to the TME with reduced side effect’s. Scientifically speaking why do you think Dox won’t kill cancer cells, if the tumour is sensitive, like the case studies already established in phase 2?
It’s called an investment case, I can leave that investment cash in indefinitely, also not worried if I win or lose. You are the one that seems to be worried about timelines and obsessing over hypothetical scenarios, are you playing with more than you can afford to lose? You can’t even acknowledge that the likelihood of success of approval is higher than failure. On approval this is likely a 10-20 bagger from 50p. That’s very good potential rates of return if you understand the science and want to invest on AIM.