The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Toukankahmoon: "...I meant if large institutions can do it. What is to say that any institution is telling all the facts..."
Have a read of your own diarrhea again - does it smell of something ? So now it's large and small companies that can't be trusted. That just wipes out the whole planet surly :-) So what BB should we move to for fun. :-)
It's sometime difficult to understand the motives of each post as there are emotions tied to some belief. But as we know we are bombarded with both Rampers and Drampers.
It might be useful to take an opinion from ChatGPT as a second opinion before getting into a ping-pong match.
Give ChatGPT a prompt and then paste the posting and allow ChatGPT to provide its opinion (not absolute truth but an opinion by AI).
So a prompt I used is :
"Prompt: I am on a bulletin board where people have the right to express their views on the company and the share price performance. There will be 3 types of posters: 1. Those who wish to ramp and hope that they can influence people to buy shares, 2. Those who wish to deramp and hope that they can influence people to sell shares and thereby drive the price down so that they can buy cheaper shares. 3. Those who are optimistic or pessimistic but have no agenda. For each post provide a score between 1 - 5 if they are a Ramper, DeRamper or Genuine. (You can choose your own prompt).
Results
For a random post that I inserted I got below results:
----------------------------------------
Scoring the Post
Ramper Score: 2
Reasoning: The post mentions potential buyout prices, which could be seen as mildly promotional by suggesting a significant upside potential without strong evidence. However, this seems more about illustrating a scenario rather than outright ramping.
DeRamper Score: 4
Reasoning: There's significant emphasis on the risks and limitations of waiting for FDA approval, suggesting that reliance on such an outcome is overly simplistic and risky. The poster uses a critical tone about the company’s strategy and the possible detachment of company leaders from shareholder interests. This could be seen as encouraging doubt and possibly selling shares out of caution or disillusionment.
Genuine Score: 3
Reasoning: The post presents a detailed analysis and includes various perspectives on the company's situation. It raises valid concerns about management and investment strategies which contribute to a broader conversation. However, the somewhat cynical view on company motives and the impact on private investors introduces bias that slightly undercuts its genuine nature.
Summary
This post leans towards being a "DeRamper" as it highlights the negatives and potential pitfalls of the current management and investment approach more than promoting the stock. It suggests skepticism about the current strategy's effectiveness and the company’s alignment with shareholder interests, which might influence readers towards a more cautious or negative view on holding the stock. The elements of genuine discussion are present but are overshadowed by the critical tone and the implications that management may not have the shareholders' best interests at heart.
Hi Touk...
You lost me - what exactly are you saying :-)
its big
its small
they have something to present
they don't have something to present
they will go just to chat to their mates
maybe they mistaken it for a beer festival
.....
anything else :-)
Just a cut and paste but we know this already:
"Preclinical research is a term that refers to, simply, any research about a drug or treatment for a disease that occurs before it is tested by human volunteers"
We are well ahead in the clinical process by minimum by 18 months maybe 2 years. But must admit their news is written in an impactful way and at first glance you would think that they have found the holy grail ....
While competitors might be able to develop their own FAP-targeting peptides and prodrug linkers, achieving the same level of optimal cleavage and harnessing the bystander effect effectively poses a significant hurdle. Avacta's head start, R&D expertise, and data from ongoing clinical trials provide a formidable advantage in this complex field.
Optimising cleavage for the bystander effect:
• Targeted delivery: The linker needs to be cleaved only by FAP enzymes within the tumour microenvironment, ensuring the prodrug release occurs near cancer cells. Uncontrolled cleavage in healthy tissues would lead to unwanted side effects.
• Controlled activation: The cleavage rate should be balanced. A slow rate might limit the bystander effect, while a rapid release could cause excessive damage to neighbouring healthy cells.
• Tumour penetration: The linker should facilitate efficient delivery of the prodrug into the deeper regions of the tumour, ensuring sufficient reach for targeted activation and bystander effects.
Challenges for competitors:
• Replicating Avacta's success: Designing a new FAP-targeting peptide that exhibits high specificity, tumour penetration, and optimal binding affinity is a complex task. Avacta likely has a head start in this area and valuable insights from preclinical and early clinical trials.
• Developing the perfect linker: Creating a prodrug linker with ideal cleavage characteristics, compatibility with different warheads, and stability within the body is a significant R&D challenge. Avacta might have proprietary knowledge and optimization strategies that are difficult to replicate.
• Balancing efficacy and safety: Finding the sweet spot between effective tumour control and manageable side effects requires extensive research and clinical evaluation. Avacta already has data from initial trials that competitors would need to catch up to.
HNY to all
Figure 5: Heavily pre-treated human sarcoma model, AVA6000 at 12 mg/kg significantly decreased tumor volume while doxorubicin at 2 mg/kg had no significant effect
Surly means it works
I thought there was an AGM on 28 June. Had that been brought forward to Monday - if not what is happening on Monday