Scancell founder says the company is ready to commercialise novel medicines to counteract cancer. Watch the video here.
Glib. The milestone payment and the deposit were just two names for the same thing. There was only one sum of money to be refunded, not two.
kenj. Out of the kindness of my heart I actually used up some of my life working for you when I should have been doing something else. In their RNS dated 30th November 2016, AVO said that they were confident that the technical development of LIGHT has been proceeding as expected. Regarding the cyclotron issue. AVO and CERN have always been adamant that LIGHT does not have a cyclotron. Both you and TW say it does. If you two are right, it means that CERN and AVO are both lying about the science behind LIGHT. That is an extremely serious matter. If you have proof I suggest you make sure that the appropriate authorities are made aware of it, especially as senior scientists at CERN are involved. It is not that I am a great fan of AVO management because I am not. But I do like information to be correct.
kenj. As you say it was a long time ago. I am currently looking at a hard copy of the schedule which I printed at the time on which I have hand written 27/11/14. That should enable you to find it. I believe that the other statement was fairly recent. It might have been in an RNS or a presentation. I cannot remember which or when but I can remember reading it. I am not being evasive but it would take me time to search through and find the sources and it is time I don't have. I am sure that given what I have said, you are more than capable of finding both. Both issues have been aired on this forum quite recently and on that occasion one of the other posters was able to quote chapter and verse on both. It wasn't that long ago so a search through past posts might be fruitful. While you are at it, please check out the fact that, according to AVO, LIGHT does not use a synchotron, minuterised or otherwise. I only mention that because you seem convinced that it does incorporate a synchotron.
kenj. Apart from anything else, AVO tells is that their machine does not include a cyclotron and it is that fact that makes it so different to its competitors and makes it safer to be around, cheaper to install, maintain and decommission. All AVO's competitors, with the possible exception of Mevion, rely on cyclotrons.
I understand that testing began in August 2016 and is ongoing as the components are integrated. The proton source and the RFQ have already been integrated and successfully tested. That leaves the SCDTL and the CCL to come. Each component has already been individually tested before integration. According to the schedule that AVO published in November 2014, integration and testing is due to be completed by the end of Q2 2017. AVO say they are on schedule.
kenji. I fully accept that it is possible to have a dishonest professor who is frugal with the truth. I've met a couple. If you read my post again you would see that I said they have very high reputations to protect. It is entirely possible to have a dishonest professor with a high reputation to protect. In any event, if some of the allegations that have been floated on theses forums are true, everyone involved in AVO is dishonest and involved in what is, in essence, a conspiracy to defraud and that includes some senior people in CERN Do you believe that to be the case?
Call me naive if you will but I would be very surprised if AVO were anything other than very honest given the reputations of the people involved with the company. They include some people with very high profile reputations in their fields to protect so would be very unlikely to associate themselves with anything that was not highly reputable and above board or with technology that was unlikely to work. I think that SMTrading is right in his assessment of the situation and that AVO have probably done all they could in regards to Sinophi.
Thanks
SMTrading. Do you have a link to the update please?
Well done cromer. It took you a long time but at last you've come up with a set of reasonably cogent arguments supported by logic. Why haven't you done it before? I actually find myself agreeing with some of what you have said this time. At the very least, AVO is a risky investment. Nevertheless, I still think you are seeing LIGHT's market as being simply the existing proton therapy market and their competitors as being confined within that market. I see greater promise for LIGHT within the much bigger photon therapy market and I cannot yet see LIGHT's competitors in the proton therapy market being able to easily compete with LIGHT in that market. Not if AVO's statements about the cheapness and simplicity of the installation, maintenance and decommissioning of LIGHT are true. If AVO goes under, I think it quite possible that their licence to produce LIGHT might be taken up by one of AVO's competitors, or by another potential player, possibly by a takover of AVO. What that might mean for AVO shareholders is anyone's guess. Perhaps you have some ideas? The figures I put into my DCF analysis were taken from earlier AVO presentations. I used Stockopedia's DCF system. I was surprised at the projection that came out but flew it up the flag pole anyway to see if anyone would salute it. Everyone ignored it except you.
Oh Dear. cromer. How many hours of your life did you waste trawling through my posts? What is clear is that you and I are both very interested in AVO but for entirely different reasons. I am not unaware of the financial difficulties they are in. Who could not be? But, I believe that if they do manage to get through their financial difficulties then they could have a very bright future because of their technology. You do not accept that their technology is superior so you devote a lot of your time knocking it, thereby bringing attention to yourself. You would have been far better off just sticking to to the financial aspects where you were on much safer ground. You might then have been able to have had rational discussions with other people on the boards, perhaps, even including me. As it is, most people have given up on you because you are not rational.
Apart from any clinical advantages there may or may not be over other proton therapy machines, the main advantage over them is cost. Even if the other companies can compete with AVO on selling price they cannot compete with AVO's lower cost of installation, lower cost of maintenance and much lower cost of decommissioning. Then there is the fact that the LIGHT machine will be able to compete with photon therapy on overall cost, something that the other proton beam therapy machines cannot do. It will have significant clinical advantages over photon beam therapy. because proton beams do not cause the collateral damage to surrounding tissue and do not cause the secondary tumours that photon beams cause. Just an aside. Might it be possible for AVO to leave its competitors in the proton beam market to get on with their thing and just concentrate on replacing all the thousands of dangerous photon beam machines.
Beaufort retains its Speculative Buy recommendation in the belief that its technology has the potential to revolutionise the world of proton beam therapy.
"The developer of next-generation proton therapy systems for cancer treatment yesterday informed shareholders that on 23rd January, Sinophi Healthcare Limited had told the Group that it wished to terminate the purchase orders announced on 25 March 2015 and 21 October 2015. Advanced Oncotherapy noted its firm position that Sinophi has no legal basis on which to make such a termination and that it will take appropriate action to protect its position. Our view: It always comes as a surprise when the market reacts violently to some news item whose impact was considered already to be priced-in. Yesterday’s announcement told shareholders nothing new. Back in November, AVO detailed the fact that Sinophi was no longer to proceed with the installation of LIGHT technology in the China-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin University in Changchun and First People's Hospital of Huai'An. Back then, AVO also confirmed that the orders for the two machines remained in place as per its agreement with Sinophi and that they were assessing other sites in the same cities as well as pursuing other framework agreements in China. Realistically, however, given the bespoke nature of the two original contracts, it was clear that no ‘replacement buyers’ would be found and formal termination was only ever going to be a matter of time. AVO’s management always insisted, however, that the contractual details simply do not permit the originator to ‘walk away’ and that there never was any binding legal agreement with respect to delivery schedules. More to the point, the contracts were composed under English law and both companies have registered offices in the UK. Nevertheless, it would never be in either of the company’s interests to see their argument fought out in the courts, particularly for Sinophi which undertakes very large operations in China where partners would be highly sensitive to any suggestion that it had not looked after its client interests correctly. As such, assuming AVO’s legal counsel has correctly advised it, the dispute will more likely be argued behind closed doors and result in reparations being made to partially compensate AVO for its loss of profit opportunity amounting to, perhaps, a few million US$. Given the pressures on AVO’s balance sheet, any such payment would be welcome although, of course, it would still represent an unfortunate outcome from what initially had appeared to be a quite remarkable business opportunity. In this same respect, Monday’s announcement regarding the possibility of the Group securing non-dilutive financing from a ‘strategic partner’ (which Beaufort believes to be the French giant, Thales Group), also provides some hope for those fearful that AVO will otherwise be forced to undertake further discounted equity placements. Investment in AVO carries risk, but Beaufort retains its Speculative Buy recommendation in the belief that its technology has the pote
Not really much news then.
Any news?
I topped up. I just couldn't resist it.
on a few small sells
I doubt if we would get an answer if we did ask. It's likely to be sub judice now, pending any legal action. My guess is that Sinophi are unhappy that AVO is unable to come up with a fully tested machine as quickly as they would like. They may have even been influenced by TW's rantings. I am sitting tight and waiting. If the sp drops, I may buy some more. That is my decision. What everyone else does is up to them.
"Of the £24 million financing, £11 million will be received shortly" I can find nothing that says that.