George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video here.
I had a similar experience going to Silverstone to watch F1 this year Agent. Prior to going I did a test so I could see the process and ensure there wouldn't be any issues when I arrived. At Silverstone you needed to have had both jabs at least 2 weeks ago or provide a negative test. I hadn't had my second jab at that point.
The test was negative and then as your daughter did, I logged in and simply ticked that it was negative. I thought you would have to take a picture of the negative test that included the QR code and that the QR code would be checked on arrival but no, that has common sense written all over it. It's beyond a shambles.
When I got there some bloke gave the app a cursory glance. They didn't even check that it was my details on the app i.e. against ID or that I wasn't just showing them a picture of someone else's. There was no scanning of the QR code, because there wasn't a picture of the QR code anyway.
The most corrupt and incompetent government in history. It beggars belief how so may idiots can get to positions of power. Well, it doesn't, you just need parents that can afford the 40k p.a. fees for Eton. The mirage of a meritocracy still prevails though.
Fair points Gents and I think the market agrees, hence the SP action. Presentations always include "forward looking statements", which if anyone ever read the opening slides, are littered with endless caveats that makes them not worth the paper they're written on but i still take AS at his word. I genuinely think it's been a very steep learning curve and he has been messed around by numerous third parties on route. I remain confident that some of these forward looking statements will be confirmed by RNS "shortly" :)
Once sales start generating revenue, it can be used to ramp up the manufacturing capacity.
“There will be high demand for testing for 3-5 years and probably much longer”.
AS prompted the interviewer to ask the last question. He made clear the issues there are with timescales in any product development, let alone any in medical. Those personally insulting him and calling for his head are frankly clueless and need to look at the shareholder value he has delivered over the past 18 months.
37 “The additional regulatory requirements in the APAC region are minimal. Commercial negotiations are already underway.”
37:30 “We have more than one route to FDA approval and I will update the market once we have a single route.” It seems the US is rightly more focussed on quality than Europe is, where we seem happy to import any old Chinese rubbish with little regard to the implications. In the US market, the superb clinical performance of our LFT will be appreciated and valued.
40:15 “We are targeting large diagnostics businesses who produce their own products but with affirmers inside.” Affectively this is more licensing deals, which we know Avacta have been very successful in delivering to date. It’s also worth bearing in mind an earlier comment: “the Covid LFT has put the affirmer platform on the global stage”. This can only help the deal making process.
41:10 “we are well advanced with 2 manufacturers, with back ups”. “It’s important that we are able to switch on capacity as demand requires”. “We will go through the process of TT, we WILL get those partners ready”. Why would the manufacturer and Avacta go through this process, at what is no doubt considerable expense, if they did not have expectations of the said demand being required?
42:15 “It will take a couple of months to ramp up to 5m pm. And of course that will also be driven by demand.”
43mins “We are working extremely closely with Medusa 19.” “We have a joint goal of delivering consumer self-testing to the market, which is extremely important to both companies”.
53:35 “the market has moved extremely quickly. The influx of cheap tests has driven the price down to somewhere between 4-5 Euros. Fortunately, we have one of, if not the best antigen tests in the world, so we are not in any sort of price competition in that sense but the cost of goods is critical.”
“We would expect to make a gross margin of between 1-2 Euros depending on whether it is through direct sales or through distributors. It’s critically dependent on cost of goods, hence the work we have been through and continue to go through not to just get the supply that is required but also to get a decent margin for us and the distributors.”
It seems that some were expecting imminent sales once CE marking was granted but the manufacturing process will take time to scale up. I think there is very good reason for this, and it comes down to who pays for the cost of goods (COG)? i.e. who is going to fund the outlay prior to sales being agreed?
If we are pessimistic and work on the basis that Avacta can achieve a price of only 5 Euros and there is a 1-2 Euro profit margin, the COG must be at least 3 Euros per test. Producing 5 million tests is 15m Euros, so a significant percentage of Avacta’s working capital. Where do those people that were expecting us to manufacture 20 million tests think a) the capacity would come from and b) who was going to fund the COG?
After a sharp sell off, I always find it worthwhile to revisit research and ignore the noise. It gives you the confidence to add, if required. I did the same thing following vaccinegate and it worked out very well. Hopefully you find the notes of use.
It’s clear the reason for the recent sell off following the June Investor Meets company call was because of a perception that AS was unsure about demand. I think this has been misunderstood although it could have been better communicated. They couldn’t have been clearer that demand is expected to be very high for 3-5 years. PI’s seem to forget that supply chains, including distribution don't appear overnight. Also the cost of goods point seems to have been missed by many.
AVACTA GROUP PLC - Business Update and Q&A - YouTube
Some questioned the need for the call to take place but it took place because people were encouraged not to attend the AGM in person.
Here are some of the key quotes -
7:50s. “The performance of our test clinically is excellent and IS driving deal making and WILL drive deal making longer term.”
14:56. “We are now a long way down the route of securing additional overseas capacity that can supply 30m tests pm”………..
“we are a long way down the road now with TT to the overseas manufacturer so that we can switch on that supply as demand requires”.
15:43 “We have a lot of commercial discussions ongoing with distributors and end users in the UK and EEA”
“As well as territories outside of those regions, including APAC regions”……. “so there are a lot of interesting overseas markets”
29:30 “In summary we are now poised with a market leading test”
“We are working with Medusa 19 on the consumer self-test opportunity”
“Over the next weeks and months we expect to report a number of commercial deals both through distributors and directly with end users.”
“There is a pipeline of diagnostics that I’m sure will be of the same quality in terms of high sensitivity, high specificity”
The recent broker note attributed 50p of the 280p target price to diagnostics and 230p on therapeutics however, many only seem interested in the LFT. Even if we didn’t sell a single LFT or any other diagnostics product, the SP should be 230p. This has created opportunity to top up and I have been taking full advantage. To think Avacta have spent all this time creating a world beating LFT to not sell it in significant quantities is ridiculous.
They have stated that demand will be high for 3-5 years. Who has site of the market and demand, AS or the brainless doomsayers on LSE stating we’ve missed the boat?
People valuing Avacta on PE ratios based on LFT sales is fine but frankly ridiculous as that’s not how biotech companies are valued.
Biotech Valuation Best Practices | Toptal
If they were valued on that basis, it would deem dozens of listed biotech companies worthless as they aren’t revenue generating.
All in all extremely positive. The potential of this company is simply mind boggling. There were two parts of the document that I have queries on and would appreciate any comments from the more informed posters. Long term posters here know that i'm a holder so please spare me any de-ramper comments. These are literally the only two negatives I could find in the whole document and after all this is a discussion board and not an echo chamber.
"Read test results after 20 minutes. Test results MUST NOT be interpreted after 30 minutes."
Page 32
I thought this was a limitation of the Mologic test but didn't know we also had the same issue? Does Innova come with the same instruction?
"In order to participate in tender contracts offered by the UK Government, the AffiDX® SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Lateral Flow Test has to pass an evaluation process at the UK Government’s Porton Down facility. The first stage of the evaluation process does not use the lateral flow test in the manner that it was designed for and there is therefore uncertainty as to whether the test can pass the Porton Down evaluation process which could delay the ability to tender for government contracts. The Group is progressing the clinical validation and CE marking of the product so that sales channels (other than the UK Government) can be exploited regardless of any delays in obtaining UK Government approval or tenders."
Page 55
I thought there was a document (that I can't find currently) that said the UK Government would consider alternative validation routes i.e. CE marking. If that's the case then it would have been better if they had made that clear although this is in the "risks and uncertainties" part of the report.
That guy on twitter. Sunny d, AVCT Facts etc has offered a charity bet. If he's wrong and we're not the sovereign test then I owe £100. If we are then he pays to the alzheimers charity. If I'm wrong I'll happily pay to his charity plus £10 for every recommended this message gets. Let's get some good out of the odx AVCT BS
Bump - This is the key part of the ODX RNS
The antigen LTT they're manufacturing is really poor and ODX is obviously just using their manufacturing capacity before they get told to manufacture the Avacta test.
Which is most suitable for home use? The throat and brain tickler with poor S&S that is likely to lead to false positives / negatives or the AN swab with world leading S&S. Couldn't be more confident about my Avacta investment.
Something previously mooted has been selling off the diagnostics division. Once the product is live and sales are being generated following a comprehensive CV, this division alone and the various endless other applications of affimers, licensing deals etc. to replace antibodies would command a huge price based on other recent acquisitions in the sector.
Avacta would then have a massive cash pile to further the therapeutics division. PREcision obviously doesn’t use affimers but TMAC does. Selling off the affimer / diagnostics division whilst retaining the right to licence affimers to advance TMAC…… I can feel myself turning into Paul Hill whilst contemplating the possibilities. We would get to see the AVA6000/ TMAC story play out whilst also getting jam today. GLA
https://supplyport.co.uk/product/mediport-less-invasive-nasal-covid-19-rapid-antigen-test-kit/
Has this test been discussed? S&S looks decent but I can't find what CT values the figures are based upon? It's AN sample and they've been through PD. Thanks in advance
Fantastic news. Getting the ESIA through is a huge de-risking project (As someone that has held SAE from 16p, I should know!).
This will definitely help progress financing discussions, which at 40m capex is nothing relative to other projects and at 90%+ IRR on conservative basket prices, i'm feeling confident.
I also expect to see minimal dilution due to the BOD's (mainly Matt Bull of course) shareholder alignment. The MOU's in place can be turned to binding and we're off to becoming a producer.
Don't forget the mine construction time is only 12 months. Exciting times ahead. Patience has been tested with ACP let's face it but I think this is going to be the transformational year we've all been waiting for.
Await Piler's comments
Don't bother engaging Strangy. These boards are full of rampers and de-rampers (unethical traders), trying to sway investors into buying or selling. Anyone that posts a statement that implies the SP will more than half without any reasoning is clearly the latter.
To me it's quite clear. Right now whether we like it or not (as tidal is an undervalued gem), the headwinds are Usk and SIMEC UK Energy Holdings and conversely the tailwinds are guess what? Usk and SIMEC UK Energy Holdings. The current SP reflects the uncertainty around each.
For the SP to drop to 5p as the trader (who is looking for a lower entry predicts), both Usk would need to be rejected and SIMEC UK Energy Holdings would need to offload their shares in a fire sale.
For the SP to recover and break new highs, we need Usk approved and SIMEC UK Energy Holdings to offload (if required) in an orderly manner, to an II.
The key question to ask ourselves is, how likely is each scenario? SWIC and UK Governments want to encourage a sustainable / net zero future but recognise there needs to be a "just transition" so for me the odds favour Usk being eventually approved. In terms of SIMEC UK Energy Holdings needing to offload their SAE shares in a fire sale, how would they do that? They can't flood them onto the open market as they hold too many shares, would need to issue TR1's, there is insufficient liquidity, everyone would see what they were doing and the market would work against them. An alternative approach is to sell the shares to an II at an acceptable price. Another option is they get a bail out/ nationalisation and retain the shares.
The best post (well tweet actually) I've seen in relation to the above is from everyone's favourite, Myles Mcnulty. He has a significant holding. His strategy is that if the above works against us, he will add more. Conversely if it works for us, he will add more. This is called having a strategy, which is something many PI's do not have. Basically believe in the long term story, add on weakness when people panic and markets overreact or add when the company has been de-risked.
I think it's a sign of flattery ES. If I'd chosen a company who's strapline could be "we stick the plastic bits together" ahead of one with 34 separate multi billion pound opportunities based on world leading IP, then I think I'd be jealous too. Fortunately I have an imagination. You have to feel sorry for them really