Member Info for marik

Polygon at it again

@Matml74, it's critical that the data is thoroughly analysed as it will be scrutinised heavily later on. Secondly there are many more patients in the trial and the primary endpoints are different. Would you not expect it to take longer?

No it's not a bad thing to temper it.

"BAMS has not vanished. It was stated that it was on the shelf. if it could be determined that it was commercially viable they would push it. I think PCR was too deeply entrenched."

@CodeJunkie, that's exactly what happened.

Sorry BitL, what do you want to debate? You said you felt misled, I agreed that I once felt misled in another company. I thought the discussion had moved on.

As the discussion is moving away from the subject of antibodies, it's time to thank Ophidian, Monkshood, ab8dct and Bella6532 etc. it's been very informative to see others on the same page re: antibody use.

GL

"It’s OK in hindsight knowing that the antibodies are there"

We've known about antibodies being involved for a while and some experience in this sector will inevitably have pointed to the use of antibodies somewhere in the process. I discussed this before, with another poster here. However, I do understand that you feel misled, I've had a similar experience in a number of other sectors I invested in where I wasn't familiar with tech involved, at the time it certainly felt like a kick in the teeth. Now looking back, you learn by being more thorough with your research and even then you can miss items.

I still fall short, but as @Monkshood made a fantastic point earlier on:

"...it will teach me to work harder at doing my research"

GL

"My confidence is targeting the Spike was based on using Affimers. Now knowing Ab’s are involved, I feel misled."

BITL, I would disagree on this point and you are welcome to gain further feedback by others here who also have experience in diagnostics. As @ab8dct mentioned, " I can't see how that complex would happen without an antibody being there, unless magic was involved". The Affimers are doing their job and the antibodies are there for a reason.

GL

@Monkshood and @Ophidian, good discussion. My view as mentioned before would agree with @ab8dct, it won't be the control line that is in question for the sensitivity and will require an antibody for the biotin-affimer-spike complex and I would also agree that it will most likely be a monoclonal due to batch variation.

I remember when NVIDIA went from $68 (2018) to $34 (2019) and investors started believing that it would never reach $68 again. Many people sold out. It's now sitting at $270 per share.

In a good year, cinema CoGs and returns are phenomenal and I have no doubt that in the long run, this is an amazing company and we could be looking at multiples of the £3.20 highs (2019). It's not just about the pandemic, but it's also about the product when packaged and sold to customers. A little bit of financial management in the near term by Cineworld and as the world comes to live with covid in whatever format it takes, should steer the company into calm waters. I believe that nostalgia and experience of cinema can't be replicated at home and with that said, would say that people will be willing to pay the price of a ticket and additional goods for decades to come.

GLA

@Monkshood, in the RNS they refer to resilience is in reference to future mutations:

"...resilient as possible to any future mutations."

GL

From the RNS it states that this was a commercial antibody which requires changing. The affimer as we've learned is working fine and as such only need to pair this up with a different commercial antibody. Some of the Abingdon scientists have decades and of experience. In this case, as the affimer is already known a lot of the matrix pairing work is reduced as we are looking for a secondary and will require evaluation of the selected affimer-antibody pairs. This will be a off the shelf exercise and not a bespoke antibody development programme.

Naturally you will mention the key players in such studies and what the cost attributions are.

As you've asked the question of fund raising, you clearly know how clinical trials are run, the costs and fund raising through the various stages especially for dose escalation and expansion oncology studies. Keeping in mind that this is a platform, in your own words, could you explain how the costs for similar clinical stage dose escalation and expansion studies pan out and how they would build up in phase 2 and 3?

It would help put the dupester theory in context for anyone else reading.

Thank you

"massively undervalued" that's understatement. I was a bit shocked as I'd been focusing on three other stocks today.

Nice movement and I expect much more to come.

GLA

I'm backing cineworld ... I believe in the company and the management.

Evening Ian,

I'm expecting two successive RNS releases, can I initially go for tomorrow after hours.

Thank you

Marik

Thanks for clarifying @Ophidian and @Monkshood. Hopefully it will help some of the less knowledgeable posters in the following thread:

https://www.lse.co.uk/ShareChat.asp?ShareTicker=AVCT&share=Avacta&thread=6509207E-C5B0-4A43-8FC6-C171F7701C9C

Also once we are back online with AffiDX, as Medusa 19 are stated as "manufacturer" on the EU COVID-19 In Vitro Diagnostic Devices and Test Methods Database, the likelihood of having a big manufacturing capacity becomes a reality. My hope is that the focus is on the US and RoW market.

Also once we are back online with the AffiDX, as Medusa 19 are stated as "manufacturer" on the EU COVID-19 In Vitro Diagnostic Devices and Test Methods Database, the likelihood of having a big manufacturing capacity becomes a reality.