Member Info for LovableLumax

Either they've lied about there gross margin for a long time now.

The above is from LOTM the great researcher who doesn't read RNSs properly. They have laid out the average advertiser spend etc in their KPIs which was another red flag (which I pointed out just yesterday). I mean people lauding LOMT and his research when the joker didn't even know their first end to end programmatic was done over 2 years ago and all that's happened is jam tomorrow and revenues falling, strategic partners walking away (look at KPIs), auditor gone, CFO gone, no statement from Chairman in any RNS, no material RNSs of note, Triplelift walking away, no director buys all the while going on work jollies while revenue slumps and CEO picks up nearly £500k pa. Mug punters still buying shares this morning. I mean the CEO only put in £50k on the 1.25p raise and I bet did so begrudgingly even though he's been milking this co for years.

Just yesterday like last year LOTM pumping this on other boards. Last year he apologised and I suspect will do the same.

* I bet now wages from April been paid out they have a little over £2m so their creditors will be sweating and demanding payment.

To be fair the NOMAD could justify not issuing a handbrake RNS as even with the rise in share price it didn't go much higher than its cash position. I said come end of April they would have less than £3m cash and was right although it came a month early. I bet now wages gone out they have a little over £2m to creditors will be sweating and demanding payment.

If anyone was interested in the IP as suggested here you buy for a pittance from the administrators. Some are still buying as a gamble but surely any bounce will be sold into.

As mentioned this is a niche space as the big money is in traditional PP and those agreements mean it's harder to drop new brands in post production. If this had huge potential Amazon or the like would have bought the IP for 10 mins revenue.

They need 50% more Q1 revenue to cover the CEO's ridiculous salary FFS. LOTM constantly updating the retail shareholder list as if they know more than the IIs who were sellling and Jonathan Milner. Little wonder the BoD had a tiny number of shares. Says it all.

Just more mug punters gambling! The recent TR1 was nominees so not II buys. All the TR1s before were sells. This was inevitable and little wonder PWC after doing their interim report wanted out.

If IIS were willing to support MIRI they would have had £Xm and would have a retail open offer raise too but IIs clearly don't wanna throw good money after bad. They have to wind things up to protect their creditors so once they pay wages for April from £2.7m what they're left with will go to creditors. Well done Jonathan Milner who took his loss and got out. Phevs said to mitigate other profits I mean how ridiculous.

Enough from me, good luck to all except those ramping here and getting others to lose cash.

MIRI didn't mislead investors as they didn't release lots of RNSs to ramp. The misleading was done via phevs and LOTM making a song and dance of nonmaterial LinkedIn posts. SAme happened the year before and they continued to mislead and ramp. It's them that needs investigating by the FCA not MIRI

A few days ago LOTM insulted me and questioned my reasoning. I hope I prevented some from investing in this basket case.

I merely pointed out info from RNSs. Triplelift resigning the MIRI account a red flag, PWC resigning the account, FD leaving etc etc rats leaving a sinking ship and don't wanna be associated and of course no material RNSs but nonsense posts from the resident rampers here. No material posts and there is no material revenue as last year and Q1 revenue highlights. LOTM had a sly dig at a poster for selling yesteday -

Good Luck with your other investments & remember the name Mirriad when you look back on things & the decisions you made in a few years time.

as i have posted so many times and was insulted while lotm and phevs continued posting nonsense from linkedin as they did last year when none of it meant material revenue with their cash burn and audit en route a large raise or death inevitable. i feel sorry for those who were duped into their relentless ramping. a shame but one always has to read regulated rnss and not bull**** from morons.

the dj chihuahua should’ve put anyone off investing and the investment case doc ridiculous and not worth reading. so many red flags here it’s ridiculous.

The terminal half-life of doxorubicin ranges from 20 hours to 48 hours. The distribution half-life of doxorubicin is approximately 5 minutes.

A reminder -

courtesy of rah on x -

the disease control rate remains at 91% according to the most recent #avct rns.

i.e. of the 11 in receipt of 250mg+, 10 have seen stable disease (or better).

what is clear from the waterfall is that the “precision effect” continues.

those on drug are not seeing growth, but crucially those who stopped the drug are also not seeing their cancer progress. these patients stopped dosing a very long time ago.

sgc currently demands a ****tail of drugs. one of which is doxorubicin.

avct has taken one drug from that ****tail (dox) and enhanced its efficacy to enable it to beat the pfs as a mono therapy.

there is no standard of care for sgc.

avct is now now near doubling the pfs in sgc and the trend shows no sign of reversal.

peel hunt put peak revenue for this indication at $1.3bn pa (7,552 patients @ $175,000 cost of therapy pa).

our broker values a 10% chance of success in sgc alone at 42.2p.

how does doubling the pfs in an indication without a standard of care result in a 10% chance of success?

perhaps they will upgrade this now the latest pfs is known… but panmure haven’t changed their target.

a 20% cos equates to 84.4p on sgc alone. that places zero value on precision, the pipeline or breast cancer and sts indications in ava6000.

a 40% cos equates to 168.8p on sgc alone.

a 51% cos equates to 215.2p on sgc alone

avct trades at 34.37p following these results.

some might call that a slight disconnect.

P1 is a safety trial and that's been proven. The MOA in also proven via biopsies and PK data. Initially we were told unlikely to see efficacy data given heavily pretreated patients and on some tumours not sensitive to dox. We got some early efficacy data and now we're told it's not enough. Huh?

H1 last year MIRI generated £390k revenue and represented 25 advertisers running campaigns through 85 supply side partners. We don't know how many campaigns on average each advertiser ran but on average each one spent £15,600 with Mirriad (likely to be nearer to £50,000 in total once others get their share).

Large campaigns like Yellowstone etc and sorted before and during production with products embedded in the stories. Remember phevs was convinced mirriad was involved in this as one of its clients had PP on Yellowstone but alas it was done the traditional route. With PP getting more sophisticated and growing it surely means VPP more suited to smaller campaigns without a lot of traditional PP. We'll see what the next few RNSs have to say.

1. Falling SP 0 frustrating for holders but can change very quickly as we've seen on less data

2. Short cash runway - not ideal but will surely extend runway within months in not weeks

3. AVA6000 short half life - nonsense, actually improvement on standard dox

4. Elongated P1 clinical trial - going for MTD but lots of data and P1B will be a lot quicker

5. AVA6000 inconsistent results - disagree, P1 a safety trial and safety profile very consistent hence no MTD

6. AVA6103 estimated time to market - in clinic next year and not looking for MTD so should be a lot faster and given amazing preclinical results recruitment and not orphan indications should mean fast

7. Lack of FDA approval - surely a matter of time for SGC

I suspect large pharma investing in billions believe ADCs to be where it's at and now PDCs are seem to be the next step up.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0223523423010863

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40259322/

courtesy of rah on x -

the disease control rate remains at 91% according to the most recent #avct rns.

i.e. of the 11 in receipt of 250mg+, 10 have seen stable disease (or better).

what is clear from the waterfall is that the “precision effect” continues.

those on drug are not seeing growth, but crucially those who stopped the drug are also not seeing their cancer progress. these patients stopped dosing a very long time ago.

sgc currently demands a ****tail of drugs. one of which is doxorubicin.

avct has taken one drug from that ****tail (dox) and enhanced its efficacy to enable it to beat the pfs as a mono therapy.

there is no standard of care for sgc.

avct is now now near doubling the pfs in sgc and the trend shows no sign of reversal.

peel hunt put peak revenue for this indication at $1.3bn pa (7,552 patients @ $175,000 cost of therapy pa).

our broker values a 10% chance of success in sgc alone at 42.2p.

how does doubling the pfs in an indication without a standard of care result in a 10% chance of success?

perhaps they will upgrade this now the latest pfs is known… but panmure haven’t changed their target.

a 20% cos equates to 84.4p on sgc alone. that places zero value on precision, the pipeline or breast cancer and sts indications in ava6000.

a 40% cos equates to 168.8p on sgc alone.

a 51% cos equates to 215.2p on sgc alone

avct trades at 34.37p following these results.

some might call that a slight disconnect.

The market isn’t rational. The share price (albeit fewer shares in issue) went up to 180p once the initial biopsy data was published (6 I believe) and here we are with more biopsies and more data supporting the platforms utility (not just high FAP tumours) and we’re down here. A mixture of poor IR/comms, CLNs and balance sheet. Of course than can change very quickly and I suspect news will be needed soon or AGM will be tricky.

Blimey this is a safety trial. They’re delivering dox, more of it to the tumour than standard dox (see biopsies after 24 hours) so yes it is better than standard dox as it is delivering the drug in larger quantities to the tumour with much less off site toxcicity. These patients came into the trial as their prior treatments led to disease progression. Not having found median PFS is superb. If that’s hard to fathom just move on. It should be quite easy to comprehend.

Blimey there are a large number of specialist printers who deal with sensitive info. Admission/pathfinder docs, annual reports, presentations etc and no they would not have spanked money on an expensive printer but get a specialist to produce and likely done in US or wherever they are needed.

Why are you interested in that? FYI they'll use a specialist and likely printed digitally not lithographically.