Member Info for PJT12

Hadn't realised that, Chris, many thanks. Agree then, they could well benefit from some fresh thinking / impetus.

BasilAlderman: "“There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.” - Oscar Wilde.

Gotta be honest, Basil (and Oscar), I reckon the current hourly news bulletins kinda dispel that thinking.

In fairness, chris_g, there is new blood at the top, as opposed to just the previous talent:

"Wilson's replacement as chief executive is Ije Nwokorie, who only just became Dr Martens' chief brand officer in February and was formerly the head of global branding company Wolf Ollins and a senior director at technology giant Apple."

Cross-ramping / deramping helps neither board. Both companies have their respective merits.

Aldebaran, as someone who's followed Avacta for several years, including the CEO's often "contradictory or goalpost moving proclamations" (an observation that many of Avacta's LTH's would no doubt agree with), rest assured that - if they did have the "holy grail of cancer care" - they'd almost certainly have been bought into by Big Pharma, and the SP would not be languishing where it now is. No offence but the fact that you place so much credence on the fact that "the CEO's told us" (so it must be true) suggests rose-coloured specs to me. A few biopsies aside, let's see more 'proper' AVCT "holy-grail" efficacy data (as opposed to wat has primarily been 'safety and tolerability' info to date) before believing the hype.

The one thing I agree with you on? You cannot compare AVCT with Hemo.

two points: i've said previously that the ****ging of wyndrum, for me as a visitor at least, suggests that many (but not all) of those doing so lack the scientific or investment knowledge to counter his views sensibly or with genuine conviction. thus, they resort to 'boot boy' / playground responses. he's entitled to his opinions as much as anyone else and only those who can counter them on a factual basis (rather than being seen to character assassinate) will help support the sp.

secondly, as far as the rns is concerned, i was impressed by the very specific outlook expressed by christina coughlin md, phd, head of research and development at avacta. i'll be surprised if the sp doesn't rise in the coming days by way of a delayed response to the rns.

I had to laugh at the post below, "What's the potential of this company?" That was the entire post, so good to see that the poster is keen to cut down the need for any of that pesky research stuff. "Billions" came the reply, which is potentially true but - for me at least - doesn't quite cover the whole story ;-)

This might make a good starting point for the questioner:

https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/research/car-t-cells

Interesting how a quick glance at these boards - or at least the length of their posters' comments - can reveal a fair bit about the company they're addressing. Those boards with primarily short sentences and 'crystal ball comments' - rather than actual considered content - are usually populated by gamblers rather than well researched investors. Doesn't that tell you all you need to know?

I really don't want to get dragged into the conversation here because I'll end-up upsetting people, many of whom I've been in here with from the early days, people I like. However, something that often goes unconsidered (often because people just don't want to believe it) - including amongst investors - is stereotypical expectations. IE We often stereotype and wrongly associate academic prowess with other personal attributes such as integrity, a lack of ego and a duty of care to us. This may seem fairly obvious but all too often our hopes (Investments?) are based around totally unfounded expectations upon a "type" (academic?) rather than the individual whose "actions and outcomes to date" are the only real thing upon which we SHOULD BE measuring them and basing our decisions. The buck stops with us when it comes to our investment decisions but we often seek to blame others who have merely provided a mirror to our own poor judge of character.

But AS also suggested the LFT was going to be huge, and antibodies were going to be upset on the sales front by Affimers......anybody notice a theme developing here. Now, imo, the "safety and tox" is great here but - like the man said, efficacy is a maybe.

Ditto.

Https://www.grocerygazette.co.uk/2024/03/05/ocado-fastest-growing-grocer/

"off".....Zzzzz.

Good to see my grammar / punctuation classes paying of there! I blame my keyboard

Out of curiosity, what did Myles' have say after the fundraise? I tried to find it on X but can only find older posts.

Https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/03/01/ocado-failed-to-deliver-marks-and-spencer/

I luv that expression, "Buy low, sell high". Like it's always so bleedin' obvious as to when those two points will have been reached. It's a great adage..........if you can invest with hindsight :)

Gotta say, I'm not a patch on some of the financially savvy individuals posting on here but - even with my limited knowledge - it's difficult to defend Big Al's actions to date (especially re. Diagnostics / buy - divest) against accusations of a scientist who is just "spinning the wheel" in order to fuel his ego where M&A strategy is concerned. That said, I'd still take a longer term view (months) and avoid selling this morning if I held any here.

Timster, I guess my expectations have been unrealistic in as much as I expected to see huge reductions in tumor size, largely based upon the the massively increased AVA drug intensity focus. The fact that that hasn't even been hinted at over the past year, all the talk of 'safety' almost makes it look like they are using the 'toxicity talk' to avoid any real mention of efficacy. I really want them to succeed, as much for the sake of the 'good guy LTHs' such as yourself as anything else. I will come back in but it is a bit of a punt for me now.

"Yeah it’s safe but so is Ribena".

A facetious comment but in fairness and based upon actual information officially released by Avacta to date, to what extent are we able to state categorically that the amount of our dox released into tumors across the majority of patients using AVA6000 makes it far more worthwhile than the standard drug currently being used. I ask because most of what I've seen to date on that front focuses solely on safety. Even the info on today's RNS seems to mainly focus on the lack of toxicity and just a couple of standout patients. Feel free to shout me down but without solid info on that front we will continue to get comments of the above nature.