Member Info for MrRipley

That’s very witty Nic. Eh. Since you love price updates, head over to Amigo. 79% down. You can say all sorts of **** over there like it’s going bust etc etc and actually be right. Go on. Take tiger with you before he cripples us all with the retro “not” punchline. I actually spat out the glass of foxes blood I was enjoying with my lunch, all over my keyboard. What a joker.

Weird isn’t it Bein.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d43747-023-00002-6

Alongside this

https://www.abstractsonline.com/pp8/#!/10828/presentation/2606

No it does appear to have thrown a spanner in their works. It’s even truants go to for FUD. It’s basically his only play.

Anyway I’m off to shout offensive remarks to women and drink cups of tea. The usual builder stuff.

Toodle pip for now.

No it’s not the best investment strategy is it. Its funny how he labels me thick, yet I danced him into giving me the answer I wanted there, on a few occasions. Why wouldn’t he just read the article is he’s so hellbent on having all the facts to make a judgement on value? I believe this puts Wyndrum to bed for good.

Thanks for pushing me to find that article Wyn. And thanks for not reading it. It means I now know you really don’t follow the research. It also confirms to me you haven’t looked at any of the science day slides or the recording (because why would you if you can’t even manage an article?) Therefore any assessment you make is made without a complete data set, and should be discounted.

Goodbye.

Binned.

Yes. 3996.

No I just wanted confirmation you haven’t read the article. Thanks.

Here’s your “thick as mince” winners trophy.

Why are you so insecure? Is it because I can fix a tap and I’m smarter than you are? You keep making comments on my intelligence, it doesn’t reflect well….

We’re more likely to be taken over now than at the end of P1a/P1b though aren’t we?

Is it because of the timeline to commercialisazzzzzion as you would spell it?

Because I’m rinsing you Wyndrum is that why you’ve gone so defensive and keep referring to me as thick?

“oh god, you won't let it drop, you really do want to go for the "Thick as Mince trophy...

If all works out with all the strings to their bow then the POTENTIAL market is huge. I can't translate that to a number because of the still unknowables of time and profits, but we are looking at chemo without many side affects as well as all the other stuff.”

Your English really struggles when you’re stressed.

So one last time, to confirm, you still believe the most likely time for a takeover is once the tech is proven?

This is priceless.

“No one can say because of the list of unknowns that
have to be addressed before a valuation can be set.”

Go on… what are they?

It’s a helpful one isn’t it Luke. Answers quite a lot of value timeline questions.

And thanks for making that point to Dacia there. The point on the lead asset in the article ties into AS comments on keeping it in house perfectly.

Dacia…. The article really is having your pants down. You haven’t read it. Stop being such an arrogant prick and actually read it.

What clinical stage do you think a buyout is most likely though Wyndrum? So I can note your likely exit in my calendar.

RAH. The overriding achievement of the article is showing that large pharma want pre clinical companies and they’re willing to take the risk multiple times. What Avacta is is multiple shots within one company. We’re the perfect takeover candidate and it’s not pie in the sky, it’s a fact.

Here it is again for anyone who missed it.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d43747-023-00002-6

“I think one of the reasons for the depressed SP is the unknown path to having the tech commercialized”

Show us you haven’t read the article, without saying I haven't read the article.

Yes I’m clearly thick. Clearly. Nice spellingzzzzz by the way.

I used to have a fantastic whack a mole coach. He’d stand there with a pipe in his mouth and say “just fcking whack it you c\/nt.”. Ahhh memories.

Anyway as you’ve managed to completely miss the point of the article being posted in response to current valuations, the point was as I made in my previous reply to your post. What you’re attempting to do is pull the topic back to stretched out timelines so you can say “well there you go, we’re years off the trial being finished” but unfortunately what this article really highlights and what you’ve managed to completely ignore is the value placed in pre clinical biopharma and the greater likelihood of a takeover at this stage. Nice try though.

“your article tells us that AVCT's current valuation is supported by AVA6K“

And what that posts tells us all is you’ve managed to ignore, probably due to all your friends on here burying it in mile long posts about themselves, the preview of the 3996 poster presentation and it’s remarks on pre clinical data. The rest of the platform using the same tech and the fact that NONE OF THAT nor any other faculty of the business is factored into the valuation of Avacta at present at all.

Again. Nice try though. Keep trying to kick that can. Night shift is it?

Thanks RD. I’ve already shot to top poster on LSE….. I’ll put that on my CV. What a valuable achievement eh.

N’awwww. Starbright. Except P1b will have the date of P2. So where does that put us? Did you no manage to follow any of that article? What’s the value of pre clinical data for 3996? What’s the value of pre clinical data for the rest of precision when you factor in 3996 consistency compared to 6000? So what’s that… 12 pro drugs in the same Plato from is it? Remember this article is almost entirely about pre clinical being more alluring that clinical. What happens when you factor in TMAC since a degree of certainty about part of it can be garnered from pre|CISION? How many in that article are extremely low in side effects and FAP activated (reference Roche being unable to achieve this) And since the article states pharma are happy to take on multiple risks, and Avacta had a plethora of potential candidates, then what I’d say is pull your head out your ****, stop trying to bring forward future clinical data in reference to an article that totally dismisses the need for it vs value with factual evidence you stupid twat. You can’t deramp this.

Nearly went a whole evening there without having a go at someone.

Yeah. I do try to hide it.

There’s some good numbers in there for you to add into some licensing deal calcs too just to really turn the screw. If anything this article completely vindicates everything you’ve been saying on Avactas valuation right now. Have fun with it.

Anyone who tries that angle now can be shut down. I really can’t be ****d with him Bein. This just shows how much he doesn’t know. And as Timster pointed out…. Where are they all now? Not a single comment from any of them.

Fact for the night. We’re massively undervalued. See article for details. This is not a ramp.

Im not after credit RAH…. I just ****ing HATE trolls and want to see them suffer and I believe this removes their last angle.

Whack it on Twitter if you could RAH.

It’s a great one isn’t it. Puts a bit flashing jazzy light and loads of glitter all over how undervalued we are and how wrong the years away from revenue argument is. It doesn’t so much put it to bed so much as it puts it 6ft under ground.

Hi by the way truant. Those fingernails taste good? I know you’re a fan.