Member Info for PL75

I’ll take it, but given the competition has mainly been Turvart’s insane ramblings...

No worries, PMS isn’t a symptom, if you’re worried just Avacta yourself again

2 for now and ‘others’ on the way. Sir Al described multiple routes to market so I’d expect the Avacta test to be available widely. Including with Avacta branding, that’d be nice, imagine becoming the hoover of virus testing products...

‘Going to the pub tonight?’
‘Yeah, just give me ten minutes while I Avacta myself’

$1.5Bn for research? I’ll send ol’ orange chops a link to the Avacta website along with my bank account details...

5 dollars a pop for those too? $900m+ right there... the govt is pretty generous right now

I found this, written in January, little did they know biotech would soar for an entirely different reason

https://www.investors.com/news/technology/biotech-stocks-to-watch-2020-include-crispr-precision-medicine/

Seems there’s a lot of innovation in the cancer treatment space, it’s a similar story to Covid for Avacta, they only need a proportion of the market to see the share price soar

Forgot to say, the track and trace app trialling on the IoW is based on testing after symptoms. I just think for the masses our test would properly support an app, it wouldn’t stop transmission but would keep it under control

Yeah, I agree, but I’m just trying to imagine the practicality of what might happen if mass testing is available. I can’t imagine the public shelling out cash for potentially no reason if they don’t have symptoms. Unless, the govt supplies the tests, they’re linked to an app and you have to have a weekly negative result to go about your business.

Apologies in advance if I’m not using the correct technical terms. We’ve already been told the test is highly accurate and specific to Covid. Sir Al has said in no uncertain terms, it works. If the virus is present it will detect it. The question is then will it result in too many false negatives i.e. fail to detect the virus as there’s not *enough* of it.

Some counter arguments (to myself!). We’ve read research saying saliva has a higher viral load so that’s a good start. Then we consider when people would take a test. For healthcare workers, I would expect them to take a test every day as the govt knows you can be contagious without symptoms. No problem there, we’ll get a positive result ASAP and a lot quicker than current testing relying on symptoms. For everyone else, they would likely take a test when they had symptoms, at that point by definition the viral load has peaked so there’ll be no problem in spotting it there either.

There will therefore continue to be some transmission as the general population would only test when they had symptoms, but I’d imagine that this testing would keep the r value below 1 as it’s then straight forward to track and fully test everyone that’s been in contact.

Would I then be correct in saying there’s no risk of failure from this point? (Should I sell the house as well as the wife? Didn’t get much for her, but I’ll be able to afford an upgrade)

I came up with $5bn using conservative estimates, apologies, let’s go for $100bn and we’ll takeover Cytiva rather than the other way around :-D

Agreed, the govt money wasted on ropey tests shows that it’s a Wild West. That’s what is so great about partnering with Cytiva (for starters) it adds huge credibility

The word used by Sir Al was substantial :-)

If the USA needs a billion tests then Europe need 1.5 billion and I think that conservative, just 3 tests per person per year. We either continue with social distancing or we test, test, test. The latter means a test to see the dentist, doctor, going on holiday, going to an event, every time you get a cough, key workers testing daily, everyone else weekly linked to an app until we’re on top of tracing?

Would 10 tests a year seem unreasonable? Then 2.5 billion (for 2 population centres) becomes over 8 billion tests. That’s $40 billion in revenue up for grabs. USA and Europe is about a tenth of the world. Let’s say $100 billion revenue? It’s not difficult to come up crazy figures based on reasonable assumptions.

Let’s not be greedy and only get a 5% market share. $5 billion anyone?

I’d say similar to Schrow, £2 as we announce more deals & progress, straight up to a fiver on approvals news, possibly a tenner depending on the deals done, manufacturing levels and at that point it depends on the cancer news when the big boys will start sniffing for a takeover. Once they’ve cured cancer, how’s about £50 and a knighthood for Alistair?

Wilson, it shouldn’t nag, if the virus mutates, they just produce new affimers to bind to the mutated virus. Simples. One of the great advantages of their affimer platform. I’d imagine it’ll be an ongoing effort, there have already been reports that the strain going around Europe is different to the original from the Wuhan lab (allegedly)

Hi gkb ;-)

No, literally. CNBC are a day behind. Here’s the press release on Quidel’s website

https://ir.quidel.com/news/news-release-details/2020/Quidel-Receives-Emergency-Authorization-for-Rapid-Antigen-COVID-19-Diagnostic-Assay/default.aspx

All bodes well for FDA approval for our test

I know I’m preaching to the converted, but this animation on Wikipedia is great for showing why antigen testing is needed rather than antibody testing...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_testing#/media/File:Covid-19-Time-Course-05.gif

I think suggesting everyone looks at the competition is perfectly sensible, however, I’m currently struggling to find any.

Looks like they’re they’re lagging behind. From 2 days ago.. https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/918930/braveheart-investments-responds-to-social-media-speculation-concerning-investees-with-projects-in-association-with-the-aptamer-group-918930.html

We’re expecting significant news flow on moving to production with multiple partners and manufacturers