Member Info for Monkshood

I wondered the same, a weak £ will explain it in part as it definitely moves according to fx rates (they must have it built into the quant algos) It was a reasonably safe bet with covid so maybe the increasing numbers of cases (outside of the UK) have helped drive some to buy in. Perhaps it is just one or more of the II's has decided to significantly increasing their holding.
The only other thing I can think of is if they have lined up a buyer for French Workwear but I was not expecting this until next year once covid is more clearly out of the way.
I topped sliced my holding a couple of times as it is hard to see that there is much more headroom left for it to go up without any significant news but who knows....

I don't blame AS, I think they just saw it as an opportunity and one that was probably not as complicated as it has turned out to be. The level of PI's buying into the company has added far more scrutiny and expectations of the company than they would probably anticipated.
On the plus side it has given them a clear financial run for the oncology work and hopefully now that they have made some key appointments better focus on the diagnostics going forward.

When they started they were targeting saliva not anterior nasal swabs, there was also no mention of S/N ratio in specific samples, most probably because it was not known at the time. Even the absolute protein ratio between S and N in intact virons was still not clear at that time.
Are the better results for Avacta's test because it targets S or because they are using Affimers? If they had targeted N would they get better results than other manufactures? I don't know, but if the main stumbling block seems to have been PD's tests because they are targeting S if so then why did they not target N. They have never released a N targeted approach with Adeptrix or produced an Elisa which targets N, so I can only assume that they did not develop anything once they had the S Affimers.
This then swings back to what someone said about them not being so concerned about the diagnostics last year.
I bought in pre covid for the cancer work so this has all been an 'extra' for me but I am not sure that they have always have been as focused on the diagnostics as the cancer work.

Not sure why nationality comes into it, but there have been plenty of Foreign companies selling tests based on N. How many of any nationality have been selling tests based upon S?

Icecool- if you look at the mutation rates those of S are at least double those of N. What is key is if the sites the Affimers (or MAbs) bind to is conserved irrespective of whether it is N or S.
It may well be a they have a superior test with S, but I would also have been happy with a slightly less good N one that could have been sold for the past six months.

Mr A- 'If Avacta had targeted the N protein then I think, in all likelihood, the test would have passed PD and, if as accurate as the S-protein-targeted one, be on the govt lists and amongst the best sellers.'
I am in agreement - what I do not understand is why they have not developed a test for N.
We know it only took a few weeks for them to develop the original affimers to S. They have maintained that if they needed to they could raise new affimers quickly if needed for variants, so why have they not developed a test for N, either in parallel or at least once it was looking like there was an issue getting an S test through PD last year.
Some correspondence I had with Adeptrix indicated that they had been expecting a Affimer to N and this was back April/May 2020 (but nothing seems to have come of it).
I appreciate that for a LFT there may be a need to modify the buffers etc but they have had 18 months now and they could have trialled them together. Perhaps they have and they are not as good as the S based test? But surely they should still have been at least comparable to the imported tests which have cleared the hurdles and would have at least then given them a product to sell earlier on.

Ophidian-
'there are multiple papers detailing where the linker in use in AVA6000 accumulates in the body in mouse and primate models'
Have you a reference ? I have requested a paper which I cannot access online that I hope may have details but the only ones I have found to date show the localisation of FAP, this as I am sure you realise is not the same as localisation of the pro-drug.

Ophidian -
'[Yes it will - except how or where the inert prodoxorubicin accumulates has zero bearing on toxicity effects that are important. Once it is cleaved - the doxorubicin that was once bound by the linker within the AVA6000 is absolutely no different to doxorubicin that may have been dosed as normal - it doesn't know and even if it did it can't behave differently chemistry and biology don't make choices based on brands. - so utterly pointless guff]

I am intrigued how you can be so certain on this. The peptide linker could cause it to accumulate in tissues that dox does not, yes, it should not be as toxic but who knows, if it accumulated to high levels even a low level of cleavage could still be enough for it to have negative effects.
I have just had a paper published looking at a range of analogues and homologues of a bioactive on a particular biological response and you would not have predicted some of what we saw. I think to just dismiss such suggestions as 'guff' is rather a surprising stance from a scientist.

That's the beauty of the OSloft take over and why I am invested here, the ability to take sensor data and integrate it on Aveva's platforms which themselves can link to other systems. Its is encapsulated in the sentence below.

'The ABS My Digital Fleet™ risk management platform integrates with AVEVA’s PI System™ operational data management platform to ingest and normalize large quantities of sensor data received from shipping fleets'

Well you had a brief moment to get in for that this morning. Great opportunity to top up before it bounced back 200p

Without being too cynical ......
If you look they upped their rating just before the last big rise (by which time they would have bought in) - they probably sold on the high then downgrade the other day to push it down so they can start to load up again. Just before next quarter they will up the price to help push it up so they can rinse and repeat.
I fortunately took the opportunity to top up yesterday.

I don't know if there is less liquidity in the UK markets at the moment but these dips seem to becoming more common place- SMWH did the same this morning, another opportunity to get some 'cheap' shares;0)

In the over 80s the death rate among double jabbed people was 53 per 100,000 people compared to 125 per 100,000 for the over 80s who have not had their vaccine.
In the 70-79 age group the death rate for the double jabbed was 14 per 100,000 compared to 47 per 100,000 for those who have not had their vaccine.
This will drop considerably for the vaccinated once this age group are given boosters.
It will also help once they have vaccinated more teenagers, the modelling predicts that this itself will save circa 3K lives (across all age groups) by March.

I have used the dip to top up, this has so much long term potential. Have a look at AML's results today- looks very positive.

@ Pigster 'How has it taken them this long to only reach pre-print?'
You clearly have never put a paper together and submitted it.

I have had three out this year, the work was done 30, 6 and 4 years ago (admittedly the first was unusual) but 3 years to publication is not uncommon. There has been a real push to get relevant Sars Cov2 paper out early for obvious reasons but under a year is still quite quick.
It is great to see this out now and looking forward to the next one they alluded to, with detailed comparison with other tests.

Yes, thanks for that Tobin.

This is from Shares at the end of last year.
'Peel Hunt’s updated forecasts point to a jump in sales from 2020’s estimated $45 million to $241 million in 2021, sending adjusted pre-tax profit up from $3.6 million to $19.5 million next year, ahead of an estimated $24.9 million of profit from $256.5 million of sales in 2022.'
They look to be on track for targeted revenue at year end which, considering the lockdowns etc this year, is good going.
Given the headwinds they have faced this year, it will be interesting to see if next years target is upgraded.

There is another advantage of using affimer linked drugs; by being bound to a target site the circulating half life of a drug (or pro-drug) can be extended as they are not removed from the blood stream so quickly . This should enable lower doses to be used for treatment.

@gje306 - It uses photonics not MS for detection. (I also hold msys so wish it did...)

The Group's strong trading performance delivered in the first half has continued into the third quarter with unaudited revenues for the nine months to 30 September 2021 of $185.0m (six months to 30 June 2021: $125.7m).

Looks to be going nicely- I did wonder in the problems with covid in Vietnam would have a significant impact (even though they have said they had taken steps to minimise the disruption) but revenues look to be similar to Q2.
I do however, wish that they would provide a little more detail in their quarterly updates beyond gross revenues.

Spending review.
2.86 In sectors where the pandemic’s impacts are still being felt, the government is helping to
preserve jobs and expertise, including by extending the Airport and Ground Operations Support
Scheme (AGOSS) in England for a further six months.
The original scheme was capped at £8M per company but not sure what the rule is with the extension (or to what extent mnzs may benefit).