Member Info for jive_turkey

I know that Big Al has explicitly said that he can't comment on the Medusa collaboration due to an NDA, but what reason would Medusa have to impliment an NDA? What do they have to gain by not building advertising a test that is coming? Just lowering expectations? Thoughts?

BAMS

It's true that Moderna have a huge pile of cash and are on the look out for smaller, promising companies to buy. I thought that Avacta might be a prime target, given their collaboration already. But the CEO of Moderna recently said that they are looking in other directions (likely crisper related companies.

From a recent article:
One thing Moderna is not interested in is small or large molecule candidates, “even if they could complement our commercial portfolio,” the chief executive said, because “we love information molecules too much.”

Thanks!

For those lucky enough to have their hands on some of the affimer powered lft beauties, what is the use by date? i.e., the shelf life?

The first Moderna product to market was their covid vaccine, and they were founded in 2010. They were working on new biotech (mRNA tech), in a similar way to Avacta. If covid hadn't come along, Moderna still wouldn't have a product to market. CRISPR (founded 2013) and Intellia (founded 2014) Therapeutics still haven't brought a product to market, despite have ~10 billion dollar market cap each. This is biotech...it takes time, but the reward can be huge.

Is that the reason for the sudden drop? Is anyone there that can fill us in?

hmm...for a brain tickler that's not very good. Of course no Ct range was given, so likely also a very skewed sample towards low Ct values (i.e., extremely high viral loads).

Indeed, and the fact that it didn't just "ok" in the animal model, but was 100% effective (after 6 months 100% of the animals on AVA6000 were alive, compared to 0% on Doxorubicin alone) means it has a much higher chance in Phase 1 than the typical drug that just barely limped over the line to go into the clinic.

In the initial CV, Avacta used hospitals in Spain and in the UK. In the 'final' CV, only the Spanish hospital was used. I find it hard to believe that the UK arm of the study would just be dropped. Is it reasonable then to assume that this arm has continued, potentially related to the Porton Down 3a 'equivalent' validation?

As has been said many times before, we'll sell all we can make. So selling to the UK gvmt, EU countries or direct to consumers, matters not. However, a nice little perk of selling to the UK is that the contract amount will need to be made public, so the SP will reflect the contract amount soon, rather than having to wait until the quarterly or yearly reports (to find out we're all millionairs).

My guess is that we'll have a second intra-day RNS this week when Avacta get "confirmation of the registration". Not the time to be day trading, I reckon.

My number 3 from the list is number 2 of "plus 4 undisclosed targets"

Whether this has any impact on avacta (i suspect not) depends on that little sentence that was cut off...what cycle threshold was used? if it was ct=20, then this is quite poor. if this was ct=31 then it is somewhat competitive.

i like tacos.

@ndn, that may have actually been true. There was likely a finished version of the LFD in January as the initial CV results came out in Feb, so testing would have started beginn/mid-Jan or so. I don't remember the context of which he said it was 'signed off'.

sweet fokin' bejesus, 1.5 billion tests a month capacity over at Innova. And we're lucky if we get 50 million in the UK. Definitely time to look overseas for manufacturing.

LFT can pick up the south african version too (hot off the press)

The science/technology of the LFT (and the driving affimer) is now proven beyond any doubt. This appears to have been baked into the SP, more or less, given the muted reaction today. Now it is up to the Avacta management to prove that they're able to bring in the manufacturing partners or other agents in, in order to hit the sales numbers that we all think are possible (100s of M per month, wordwide). Once that begins to take shape (i.e., numbers announced, clarity where BBI, Abingdon, GAD, etc, all stand) and orders begin to come in and be filled, the SP should have a massive re-rating. I guess that's just how AIM works. Very different from NASDAQ and the NYSE where investers are looking ~6 months in the future, here it seems to more like weeks. There is an eight billion pound tender out (in one country) for an LFT, yet the most likely contender of that tender is worth less than a tenth of that one order. Crazy. But I guess this is what sets up the 10-100 baggers that become legend on AIM. The big biotech on NASDAQ have their long term potential priced in (e.g, CRISPR $9.2 billion based on a technology unlikely to make a profit for the next 5 years, but beyond that is likely to be revolutionary), so the 700 million mcap here seems conservative, at best. But, for LTHs, whether or not the re-rate is overnight or takes a year or two, i guess it doesn't matter too much (although in this case, I'd guess the re-rate is weeks/months away, rather than a year or 2).

Agreed, I had hoped for more. I guess the market is now just waiting for the business plan to come out (i.e., orders, manufacturing capacity, etc). Which hopefully will lead to a few weeks/months of solid rise.