Adrian Hargrave, CEO of SEEEN, explains how the new funds will accelerate customer growth Watch the video here.
Looking back over yesterday's AGM I take the following as regards what to expect in the next 6-12 months for AVA6000 :-
1 Complete P1a to get MTD or equivalent.
2 Adjust P1b study to maximise the expectation of significant results. The essential aspect - having established safe dosage regimes from P1a data - being AVA6000 efficacy v straight Dox. Efficacy being the key word.
3 Undertake and closely monitor P1b trial bearing in mind that ' Mass media' need a 'human interest story' - ie one in which efficacy translates into positive benefits for real patients. Stories about the chemistry involved - however interesting to specialists - is ignored by the Media if there is no 'human interest' story that elicits emotional feelings rather than academic thought. The moment we get efficacy translated into a human story will be the main tipping point in my view - and I reckon by this time next year at the latest we will have that story.
......and it came to pass that a certain CEO went up to Wimpole Street W1 and he did minister thus -
Verily, verily I come to say unto you all that I speak is true. For there was a woman who once brought her baby into work and asked her CEO what he thought of her baby's looks. And the CEO did look upon the baby and saw that it was exceedingly ugly and did say unto her, 'did you give birth to this or did you get it from the London Zoo?'For he knew only the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
And the woman did then batter him to death - because he told the truth.
Here endeth the lesson in truth.
Ipad
You raise a very good point though unfortunately the damage was done last year. Just read again this bit from the RNS of 8 November 2022 :-
'Avacta Group plc (AIM: AVCT), a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company developing innovative cancer therapies and powerful diagnostics based on its proprietary Affimer(R) and pre|CISION(TM) platforms , announced on 18 October 2022 the details of a proposed Open Offer (the "Open Offer") to raise gross proceeds of up to approximately GBP2.0 million through the issue of up to 2,106,980 Open Offer Shares at 95 pence per share.
The Open Offer closed for acceptances at 11:00 am on 7 November 2022. The Company is pleased to announce that it has received valid applications under the Open Offer (including under the Excess Application Facility) in respect of 16,258,999 Open Offer Shares from Qualifying Shareholders (the "New Ordinary Shares"). This represents approximately 772% of the Open Offer Shares offered to Qualifying Shareholders pursuant to the Open Offer.'
In my opinion, either the Nomad was so incompetent that they totally misread anticipated share demand from existing investors, or, as some might put it, a 'stitch up' was put in place that benefited the Convertible Bondholder and not us the shareholders. Just think how many more shares could have been allocated based on a much greater allocation of shares than the measly 2m. I thought then that to have a 772% disparity between allocation and demand highlighted 'a bad smell' - and I still hold that view as the incessant dumping by the seller continues. Just think how many more 'sticky shares' could have been issued last year.
Icecool
Investing in an AIM biotech is almost always classified as 'high risk' by any investment analyst worth his or her salt.
Experienced investors therefore tread very carefully when putting money into 'high risk' investments - and always after doing their own due diligence. So if there are any 'new folk' out there who require your assistance with 'clear and concise facts' then in my view they should not be investing in an AIM biotech as they clearly do not have the experience or knowledge regarding the risk factors involved to make such an investment.
Your altruism therefore doesn't stand up to any kind of scrutiny from a 'high risk' investment perspective in my opinion - though your 'words of wisdom' will of course be thoroughly welcomed by the trolls.
Bella - Quite right. I stand corrected. MAGA megamorons.
Permit me once again to politely request folks not to do what the trolls want them to do - which is to respond to their deliberate tactics of putting out 'bait' to engender a false argument with those who keep on falling for the oh so obvious tactic. The current 'bait' - funding will be required - is only a means to 'hook' as many as possible to distract from all that is now clinically demonstrated and positive. Of course funding is required to carry out further clinical trials (!) as with any biotech -but what is far more important is the potential outcome of the trials - which looks very positive after today's RNS. In other words, the potential rewards after today's RNS far outweigh the costs of development.
Of course, shorting trolls have absolutely no interest in anything but creating deception and confusion for their purposes. They have their own agenda which has nothing at all to do with facts or the truth and is very much along the lines adopted by the serial liar Trump and his MAGA morons who still say that the US election of 2020 was 'stolen' regardless of countless court and other judgments to the contrary. Neither 'Avacta trolls' nor Trump and his delinquent MAGA 6 January 2021 insurgents care a hoot about truth so engaging with them is a total waste of time. Just use the green boxes in the case of Avacta- it's what they are there for - and keep this BB discussing Avacta amongst those who are genuine shareholders and who care about the science.
Usually when company seeks to tap the market ('build a book') it states the reasons to potential investors. So far I have seen nothing - and I have checked what TW has said in his article this morning - other than the money was supposedly required because the £27m we have 'is falling rapidly'. That doesn't wash with me. If it were the case we needed funds for operational reasons then Avacta would surely have waited for positive news to arrive to push up the SP and then raise some more funds.
Far more likely in my opinion is that we may have been looking to raise some funds because we had a potential target acquisition in our sights - probably on the diagnostics side - that required a few million and current funds are of course already planned for and allocated. That would make sense to me and explain any consulatations in the market-place - but what has been put out by TW et al doesn't make any sense to me at this moment in time - but let's see how things pan out over the next few months.
The two RNSs today should be read as part of the same story. Shaun's appointment on the day that confirmation of 'anticipated strong news flow in the coming months across the group' is no accident in my view.
Many thanks to Avacta for hearing and acting on shareholders legitimate concerns before the AGM on 28 June.
RAH
' if you are sat on a solution to an “urgent, unmet need” (their words, not mine) and you believe you have found your RP2D (lower for longer) doses then why is P1b not being run in parallel?'
Just so you know I have asked a similar question myself on Investor Meet so hopefully we may get some clarification as to when Phase 1b is expected to commence.
Livedata
I couldn't agree more. The so called Investor Presentation which took place on the 25th of April was clearly a very damp squib with the result that the SP has gone from over 130p to this morning's 104-107 as I type. A decline of some 25%. Just look at a historical chart to see this is the case.
So in my opinion there HAS TO BE a substantive RNS between now and the 28th June otherwise the SP will be another one way bet for shorters. I just hope that the BOD understands that a 'no new news' must mean 'new news' between now and the 'no new news' AGM on the 28th to halt this SP decline. Fingers crossed this is the case.
Icecool
Whilst I quietly share your optimism I would never say 'approval seems like a mere formality to me' for a Phase 1a trial - yes I know it's about our platform rather than dox - but it still means the patient sample is minute and therefore making such a sweeping and generalising statement at this stage - particularly for an AIM company - is unwise in my view. It's the Phase 1b study that will give us a better idea of efficacy as Avacta themselves have said.
As for waiting, well I built up my shareholding some while back in this company so even if we do not establish an MTD this time round I won't mind another cohort since for me pharmacological effectiveness is what will count in the end. But that doesn't mean that I will attend an AGM where I will 'go in as a mushroom and come out as a mushroom' ie, learn nothing going in, learn nothing coming out and still be in the dark about Phase 1a. I've been to far too many AGMs - and met enough 'top brass' - to make me a little wary about actual company intentions and objectives. No offence to Avacta.
Still it's the weekend approaching, and in line with your observation regarding the strap-line used in the Guinness advert stating 'good times come to those who wait' I can only say I very much agree, or better still, Tiochfadh ar la.
s
Let's be honest about the current situation and why this BB is a lot quieter these days. As I see it -
1 Daily and constant 20k/25k et al chunks of shares dumped on the market depressing not just the SP but LTHs like myself as well. That's the reality and we can all see it day after day.
2 The most important news expected is about actual progress of the ongoing AVA6000 P1a trial. Posters, diagnostics etc. whilst part of the overall picture are not the burning issue right now. AVA6000 is the burning issue. It is the elephant in the room.
3 I just hope there is a very specific RNS regarding AVA6000 by 28 June - with others I am expecting something of course - otherwise a 'no new news to discuss' AGM doesn't cut it for me - not even for bikkies and a buffet lunch with chit chat. I'll just stick to Investor Meet and hear 'no new news' munching my own bikkies if there is diddlysquat between now and 28 June - and watch the 20k/25k 'plop plops' on my own Level 2 screen.
So come on Avacta and put some substance in the form of a positive RNS behind the 'hyping' of this AGM ASAP - and definitely on or before 28 June. Otherwise even Godot will arrive by then! (with acknowledgement to the great Irish playwright - 'yer man' Samuel Beckett).
Safebreaker
Your assumption is 100% wrong. Note I used the words 'us long term investors' in my posting :-
'So LTHs who believe in Avacta's future prospects also have to accept the 'noise' of traders - both positive and negative - because they are just as much a part of a functioning market as us long term investors. It's just how it is.'
I do though have many years experience of financial markets and have seen most things in my time - good and bad - from both a technical/chartist and fundamentalist perspective. I've lost count of the number of courses I've been on - including an MBA. I have also built up a significant small library over the years because I'm interested in markets from many points of view. I am a LTH in Avacta and have experience of biotech investment and biotech analysis and presentations.
I therefore understand investment risks and do my research before putting money into something risky such as a biotech. But I am no trader and like others here have bought well below today's current price and am happy to hold as I believe we are just at the beginning of a journey that holds a lot of promise in the field of oncology.
I hear what some are saying here as regards AIM, traders, ramping and de-ramping, but we should not lose sight of the obvious fact that Avacta is a small biotech company with an associated 'high beta' - ie high volatility - rating. And of course it's listed on AIM not the main market.
From my perspective this means that variations in the SP swings will exceed market beta averages - which is exactly what technical based traders look for above all else. Swings mean money - and big swings can mean big gains or big losses. Unfortunately for around 70% of PIs it ends up being the latter if they keep gambling on the direction of the SP for any given length of time. But for all those who lose out there is always a never ending supply of new traders to take their place and try their luck. And ramping and de-ramping to some degree is simply part of the de rigueur behaviour of many traders - both long and short term - though many short term traders practice both depending on their daily trading position!
So whilst market news in the form of RNSs provides the backbone to the SP up to a point - trading sentiment both of a positive or negative sentiment that gathers enough pace will drive the SP to both highs and lows. However, this is irrelevant to the actual progress that the company is making - though does of course matter when the company goes to market to raise new equity funds. Nonetheless in the overall scheme of things short term traders will only have relatively short term effects on the SP unless there is a material and significant change in the anticipated prospects of the the company either way which then simply creates a new trading range. The news though does not usually alter the beta rating - something that many PIs fail to understand - but professional traders know this all too well. Add in the fact that MMs know this too so will adjust prices to facilitate trading momentum within any new range. So the more volatility there is the more likelihood of generating a buying or selling momentum spree. As Einstein is reported as saying, 'a man should look for what is , and not what he thinks should be'. So LTHs who believe in Avacta's future prospects also have to accept the 'noise' of traders - both positive and negative - because they are just as much a part of a functioning market as us long term investors. It's just how it is.
Have a read of this job description poster today - https://avacta.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Assay-Development-Associate_Senior_Scientist.pdf
Note the paragraph - 'Our pre|CISION™ tumour targeted chemotherapy is undergoing clinical trials. This
targeted chemotherapy platform releases active drug ONLY IN THE TUMOUR [my caps], thereby limiting
systemic exposure of potentially toxic anti-cancer treatments.'
Unequivocal!
From what I can see from certain posters on here there is clearly a pattern - used many times by trolls before - to create FUD by the mischievous use of positive, published data. In our case there is the obvious attempt to throw dust over the fact that we have MORE - not less - data than would be expected from a standard Phase 1a trial yet the trolls come up with things such as 'yeah, but that doesn't mean it works just because it's found in the biopsy' etc .etc. In other words, they are creating issues which have little or nothing at all to do with a data rich, PHASE 1a trial. The FUD is added to by the 'follow the squiggly lines' cult (ie chartists) who add fuel to the fire with their 'it must drop back to fill a gap' pronouncements which become self-fulfilling when they all do what the 'squiggly lines' tell them to do and sell. No wonder the MMs love them as it makes their job so much easier and more profitable.
As all researched LTHs here know the primary purpose of a Phase 1a trial is to evaluate safety and everything else is a bonus. However, since AVA6000 is based around a well-researched 'warhead' (doxorubicin) the novel aspects lie in the targetting of the tumour and delivery mechanism - leaving healthy tissue unaffected. The fact that we have extra data from a closely supervised Phase 1a reflects the confidence of both our own company scientists and the safety committee supported by the results of the pre-clinical trials which have now found support in the Phase 1a trial. We are therefore ahead - not behind the curve - as far as data gathering is concerned.
Establishing an MTD will of course be interesting but if the profile of the pre-clinical trials is replicated then the tolerance levels will be far higher than 'straight dox' as ably demonstrated by others here. Also, at this stage I would not expect Avacta to say more than they need to in respect of cleaving or potential degree of tumour shrinkage. That, for a number of reasons, remains commercially sensitive in my view and in any case is for later trials to determine. If you release too much early data you can attract the attention of unwelcome predators who if nothing else can distract attention and waste valuable corporate time better spent elsewhere. So if there is no further news until Science Day I do not expect any sudden revelations on that day.
There was a not too subtle message to the market - positive in my view - when Avacta released the latest RNS on 19 December. This announcement pre-Xmas that the much awaited update on the AVA6000 trial will occur BOTH in 'early January' as well as on the Science Day in February will not have gone unnoticed by 'Mr Market' as the RNS of 19 December basically eliminated any fear that any RNS would appear in the dreaded Christmas Eve to 30 December 'graveyard' window. For those not familiar with this phenomenon just look at the top article 'Competition Time' on TW's website - https://*************.com
My own reckoning is that Avacta must now have the data - albeit still in pre-published form - and cleared the RNS of 19 December with the Nomad as regards January's announcement. So why would the company not opt for the 'graveyard' window to release an RNS if the news was negative like all the other companies with news to 'bury' and no doubt on their Nomads advice? Ergo the January RNS only makes sense from my experience if the news is positive.
For LTHs :-
It just so happens that Avacta is the type of share that short-term traders like because of :-
1 Its volatility
2 Its relative liquidity to buy, sell or take a position
3 It happens to be in a volatile sector - namely biotech
4 Shorting outfits like ************* occasionally have Avacta on their radar
For those with Level 2 they will see the usual bursts of selling until a certain level is reached and then there is a spate of buying back. Rinse and repeat ad nauseum.
For LTHs it's all quite meaningless as the momentum is driven primarily by traders of every description - from 'technical traders' with their Fibonaccis, trend lines, averages and candlesticks - to those who just blindly follow 'tipsters'. They have no interest in fundamentals so don't waste your time asking questions related to fundamentals. Traders are only interested in moving the SP in the direction that suits them - ergo the use also of rampers/derampers on BBs - to create momentum in one direction or the other by spreading 'false news'. The sad fact is that the vast majority will end up losing money - as exemplified by the sponsored ad above for City Index (75% lose money) as well as shown in books such as The Naked Trader.
Much better in my view to take risks as an informed and research based investor than gamble on SP movement based on so-called 'technicals'. Sooner or later most traders get hit with news - usually in the form of an RNS - which has a major impact on the SP in the wrong direction as far as they are concerned. Those in over leveraged positions get hit the hardest.
So just chill out and ignore the 'noise' in the current SP movement. We are literally only days away from what could be highly significant news for both Avacta and patient treatments in the field of oncology
BV
You state that 'Emerging does't mean final'. Where did I say - or imply in any way - that emerging means final?
You say that there is nothing in the RNS to say that Phase1a has finsihed. Where did I say that Phase 1a has finished?
As someone who passed A level English I know the difference between 'emerging', 'finished'and 'final'.
Oh, and I know all about the Science Day and its objectives. It's announcement today correlates with the 'emerging' data of the P1a trial. That's why it is RNS'd today.
I've read the RNS a few times and from my perspective I reach the following deductions :-
1 Why would Avacta hold a Science Day that will include data 'emerging' from the P1a trial if that 'emerging' data was not positive?
2 Why would Avacta invite fund managers and analysts to the Science Day if not to present them with reasons to invest themselves or recommend to their clients to invest in Avacta unless the story was positive?
3 Why would 'key opinion leaders in the field of oncology' be invited to attend - and speak -unless the emerging P1a data was positive?
4 If the 'emerging' data was negative rather than positive why would you want to include it in a Science Day?
So, whilst we do not know more specific details about the 'emerging' data from the P1a trial, in my experience of biotechs it is inconceivable given the above that the data is not positive - even if further work may be required to further substantiate the 'emerging' positive data. We will know more of course next month but today's RNS definitely points towards a positive RNS next month - though dependent of course on the analysis of the 'emerging ' data which in my view could well be of a 'game changing' nature, ergo the invitation of both oncologists and the financial community to the Science Day.
One further aspect of the Capiversatib trial needs highlighting as found in this article by the Institute of Cancer Research - https://www.icr.ac.uk/news-features/latest-features/capivasertib-a-huge-success-story-for-uk-science
Note this part - 'Small-molecule cancer drugs like capivasertib are designed very precisely to have the correct shape and other features to ‘lock’ into a cavity in their target protein, like a molecular key. Doing so is intended to block the protein’s cancer-driving activity.'
We know from our CEO's presentations that AVA6000 was also 'designed very precisely' using FAP to target and 'lock into' or cleave the tumour cells - and hopefully delivering a greater 'warhead' in the form of a larger dose of Dox) with fewer side effects than other alternatives. So whilst we are using a different technique to AstraZeneca to achieve the 'lock in' - the Phase III success of Capiversatib is definitely an encouraging development for AVA6000 in my opinion.