Member Info for marik

You'll find this amusing. A short while back, someone gave a masterclass on valuation, by focusing on just the diagnostics division:

1) "emerging biopharmas can rate at 20+ P/E’s" and
2) "To support the current SP we need to be earning about £25m p/a".

Funny enough even on that basis, the Avacta daily LFT sales need to be <50,000 = current share price

Most of the cinema seats at my local were filled this weekend.

That's one way of putting it.

I posted this earlier and felt that this was better written than by our own press.

Is this Monday, the first delivery for Affidx?

This video provides an excellent review of AVA6000 and therefore no further comments required.

https://avacta.wistia.com/medias/xzmds8p6fy

Todays price drop imo is temporary. The news will settle in investors minds shortly.

Not all bispecifics are created equally. To my knowledge Avacta is the best I've seen and the market is big. These companies are ideal for M&A and Avacta will be valued well above the Teneobio deal. I think the window for M&A will be small but not too distant from now and may well trigger a bidding war.

There is a lot of mileage left in Affidx yet. Looking forward to news in the near term.

That makes for scary reading. I'm hoping that vaccines, meds and testing (especially Affidx) are used to stop the deaths. Variants will increase as long as we continue mixing and the lockdown is lifted.

It certainly is a great long-term share. I think there is also exceptional potential in the near term as well. Next two weeks could be a positive eye opener for many.

Averaging 53p and exiting around £1.59

Motley are not worth reading. They are under researched. It's a big hold for me.

https://twitter.com/MylesMcNulty/status/1420759001701044234

"@avacta has four potentially multi-billion $ platforms."

I have to agree with him on this.

This was Deeks response on Twitter:

"This should become a classic teaching example for medical schools for years to come about how not to interpret statistics. Shame on Oxford for providing us with it."

https://twitter.com/deeksj/status/1419340671761240064

I've read his previous work which was good, but on lateral flow tests, I believe Deeks has made the right conclusion. Aggressive, but right.

Agreed, it's looking very desperate.

Agreed JESK

NDN71 I think you are paranoid. I have not contributed to any kind of abuse. You've just singled me out for no reason. Take a break and come back in a few days.

In case anyone missed this, it was a Letter to the Editor from Jon Deeks et al., regarding Peto T. In short they claim that LFT testing evidence by the Peto team "has not been obtained and reported with adequate attention to the scientific method required to provide a sound evidence base for policy-making."

That is quite an aggressive stance against Innova and potentially future tests carried out by Peto et al.