Member Info for opti_mystic

Avactarians be like "wow, incredible, ground breaking, innovative, amazing, huge commercial opportunity" AIM market be like "Hold my beer, here's 2p"

The valuation of this technology is it seems, perennially difficult. Seen everything from £2bn to I think £100bn. It is very difficult to know how it will pan out. One thing is for sure it will be many times the current share price. The main four Seagen drugs turnover about $3.3 billion per year now but it was also about the leveraging of the assets going forward that seemed the basis for the price including the fact that they were quite a lot further down the line in terms of the phase of the trials at which they are at. The discounting is less at that stage than where we are. If this tech is as amazing as it seems to be, treating over a million people per year (at a cost of around £100k per patient) the peptide being able to be bolted on many, many things, the wide utility of that across very many different cancer indications, the ability of big pharma to renew patents for big pharma's most successful drugs that have a patent cliff coming in the next few years' , it has enormous potential to be the number one platform and to expand the reach of existing therapies, all at a tenth of the cost of current ADC's. In theory and I think in practice, over a ten year time frame it worth is almost incalculable. But that isn't how pharma works nor is it how the ridiculously unwieldy and time consuming regulatory background works. We have a delivery system that targets FAP. Regulators evaluate a drug for each specific cancer indication and trials have to be run in each indication FAP positive. The cost of that alone is huge and that'll be taken off the price. Personally I would be disappointed with £5bn in view of all of the above I'm hoping for at least £10bn = £20 per share ball park assuming 500 million shares, so a little more dilution which I think is inevitable. If 6103 FAP Exd works I think we can get that maybe a little more. I'd welcome the mid to higher range of Ice's case study but think we'd have to wait quite a bit longer than a year to 18 months to get there.

BuenaVista

"One point: is the AVA6103 human tumour animal model really from a top 1-resistant tumour? I missed that in the presentation but if true the complete remission is an even more remarkable result."

+++

- Assume you found this in the presentation, however:

https://www.investormeetcompany.com/meetings/interim-results-491

At 5:40 CC discusses the human donor for the model. She states they were previously dosed with Irinotecan.

Exotecan is much more potent (*20) chemotherapy than Irinotecan as seen in slide 24.

https://www.investormeetcompany.com/meetings/interim-results-491

All correct but the point is that the tumour is pre-treated with a topo 1(which sadly was not successful) and therefore is demonstrating topo 1 resistance. AVA6103 obliterated it. Yes Exatecan is much more potent, but other companies have to moderate Exatecan for that reason, they can't use Exatecan because of its toxicity, Irinotecan being a less toxic version of Exatecan. If 6103 does what it says it will do, it's a game changer.

Nlgb, give the guy a break English is not his first language and whilst it isn't perfect it is comprehensible which at the end of the day is all that matters.

Ah I see just your own target. Well if it's of any interest to you, I think that is likely to be exceeded.😁

I'm surprised watching2 that you value the company so lowly. On a pretty standard five times peak sales, that suggests peak sales of only £500 million assuming 500 million shares in issuance at the time. Looking at the various documents Avacta has issued even on just two indications for FariDox SGC and TNBC it's way higher (£1.3 billion) than that and that doesn't include the much larger market potential for HR+ and HER2+ for that first drug. Valuing the company in this way attributes zero value to other indications for Faridox nor to the wider applicability of the platform nor anything to the expected blockbuster 6103. So I am curious, how did you arrive at £5?

I can't see us licensing out to a potential future competitor for the very indications our drugs could target and cure only better and safer than the current incumbent like Enhertu. To me the obvious way forward is just to take their market if we can do it better and I think we can. The they have a choice buy the next big thing at the appropriate price and control what happens or lose the revenue. The NHS doesn't buy it as it's too expensive. I am sure with manufacturing costs one tenth that of an ADC we could come to an agreement that is still very profitable.

Yes I know cindercone, he doesn't know, he himself said he doesn't know but as he also said he is already an owner of shares so he isn't basing his investment decision on what someone here says the price will be in six months because he said he bought two years' ago.

Alde give the guy a break. Not everyone is brilliantly well informed he's just looking for an educated guess and maybe a bit of reassurance, no need to jump down his throat. United, it could be anything, it's too difficult to predict. Years of operating around shares have taught me not to predict the future share price. You'll just have to be patient but obviously most of us are invested here on the basis the company is highly under valued and I haven't changed my mind on that. Ice did a case study on Substack which cover a range of values at buyout based on the virtues of 6103. You can read that and take it as reassurance you're in the right investment or place no value on it, it's up to you!

Yes Ice, CC definitely frustrated by what she couldn't say but was super confident. The tone regarding funding is they're not worried I think pretty much said it out loud. CC could not have been more confident. There is zero doubts in her. Was asked about Philogen and Bicycle and basically said they expect they will only manage a drug to blood plasma ratio of 10-1 compared to our 100-1 with the follow on expected outcome of that being not as efficacious nor as safe resulting in similar toxicities we see in ADCs.

There won't be a placing they quite obviously expect to do a deal later this year and if and only if that doesn't complete will they go for option 2 which is funding from a specialist investment and only if that's not possible will they go to a placing.

The June 2026 date is significant. What they've effectively done is pay two payments from the recent raises and cleared the floor until post 30th June 2026 when they expect to have sufficient TNBC data to convince someone to part with quite a lot of cash. They're confident, I believe, in the persuasiveness of that data. By doing this it also extends the cash runway as that's another over £6 million quid they don't have to find whilst keep shareholders on side no more dilution for the time being. I believe that they won't mind maybe some dilution by paying in shares for the loan when the share price is quite a lot higher than where it is now. I think they're super confident. So I'm expecting a deal on TNBC in H1 next year if not before. A licensing deal this year. Lots of good things to come in the next 9 months.

I agree Ice the financing is weighing heavily on the progress at the moment. They tell us they have deals lined up and a lot of interest but the market is like meh, we'll believe it when we see it. So we're stuck in the mid to low 50's. Once there is visibility of financing I think we're away. The science is very impressive.

Sandy, don't bother, everything Wyn writes is unimportant and engaging is endless word judo. Pivoting from one thing to the next. It's like trying to nail jelly to the ceiling. Taking him seriously is a mistake. You're invested, in Avacta, he's invested in Wyn.

That being the case Russell, my recommendation to you is sell one share every day, you'll make a fortune!

@avctIpmatters, exactly.

I agree with almost all of that Bella. The only minor point I'd make is as we essentially have a years grace on the bond the £13 million is simply 4 times the £3.25 million we had agreed to pay, not the amount upfront for a deal just the minimum amount Heights would accept. I hoping for a bigger sum than that as the beginning of the partnership.

As I've written before here I definitely think there is a thought through strategy at play. Some people are asking for an update on TNBC. That is not going to happen in the near future for strategic reasons in my opinion, The company have stated next year probably 30th June. Why? By then we will also have 6 months or thereabouts of data on 6103. TNBC update along with initial data on 6103 = ££££££££££££. Then we're open to bids. In the meantime we have our peptide on another company's warhead SGC update and IND filing at year end for 6103.

I'm not sure exactly where I stand on this. RH can have the necessary affect whether he is chair or not. His strength of character won't allow nonsense to get in the way of a better outcome so I don't think it is necessary for him to become the chair. However, being told they know about the CLN and it's their first priority and literally nothing happens until RH arrives shows a shocking lack of commercial know how. We don't know exactly what Chilton has or hasn't done, no announcement doesn't mean no progress but with his recent new appointment I think he thinks the writing is on the wall.

Everything points to the very positive side from here. It wasn't long go this was priced at 30p. We won't see 40p again imo. It won't be long before we're north of 70p. Deal for pre|CISION attached to another company's warhead is on the horizon. A chunk of cash will be attached to that. Still no PFS reached in SGC. No doubt progress with TNBC. IND filing for 6103 on schedule, in humans early next year. Safer, more efficacious chemo. Partnering opportunity towards the end of the year. Lots of data being gathered with some revealed at ESMO in a few weeks. Lots to look forward to, onwards and upwards.