Member Info for PL75

Nice one Derek, sharp as a cue ball

Yeah, 20p placing I heard.

**** off Derek. You’re the twat that decries pointless posts whilst starting stupid threads because you’re bored.

Whoops. Wrong account again. Went a bit too early, sorry about that Timster. Btw, are you on the rota for Xmas day this year? There’s no way I’m covering for eggy again, no matter how important he says his bin dipping is.

I can’t wait for the C7 data. It’s going to be sensational, certainly transformative. I’m pretty sure that there’ll be some licence deals to go with it too once big pharma see those numbers they’ll be queuing up.

Derek, when you’ve filtered someone you can’t see anyone’s name next to anything, all you see is a green box. Your binning skills are on a par with BVs.

I wouldn’t be adverse to that oxygen. I wouldn’t mind regular updates either - if they were consistent and aligned to clear strategy.

BV, you were adamant and you were wrong, on more than one occasion. The wording was always clear. First time treatment.

Apology accepted.

First line treatment BV. Remember that?

Listen from 20:00 for full context, it’s about 20:30

Chris said it.

DTW, a waffling CEO is not a mastermind poker playing genius. Anyone with a calculator knows they’ll need cash. There’s a decent argument of the opposite, advertising they’re in early stage talks to bring out others and get some competition going. They have some good tech, they’ve said it works, the next stage is to sell the tech or bring in cash by hook or crook to get in to a strong negotiating position down the line. Whack out a raise, get the funding monkey off the back and crack on if need be. Alternatively, licence it. Have a strategy, stick with it.

JT, they’re enrolling patients with no prior treatments to C7 and the 2 weekly study which is a change in protocol. I don’t expect the same as they’re likely to prefer patients with no prior treatment, but the change in protocol does not mean that all patients won’t have been previously treated.

Brilliant, if all else fails, bring out the 'gap'. Where's Elliot when you need him?

Good discussion NY, wouldn't disagree with any of that. The twatterati are out of control and trying to leap well ahead of where we are. I had no expectations of the data release being anything more than a data release. As it happens, it wasn't, it was a presentation followed by a terrible interview. The responsibility for that lies with Alan.

We're not there yet, but it'd be nice to know where the &^*% we're going. Traders gonna trade, let them crack on, I personally don't care about the short term price, it's about the exit price for me which should be many pounds above where we are. Penny movements are irrelevant. This thread for me is about the leadership and strategic direction of the business, not a short term discussion. The obvious clowns can be easily ignored if people chose to.

He needs to at least be consistent. It there's a grand behind doors plan I'd be equally delighted that there's some thought going in to strategy but appalled that it's not being properly communicated to shareholders. It's a mess. One minute we have an M&A strategy, the next business update he spurts out he might flog it. One minute it's about the big splash of the full data set, next up there'll be a detailed data release of the data so far which then becomes a summary. As always there's no need for analogies, it's obvious the longer they retain the asset and it continues to perform well in the clinic the greater the theoretical value. Theoretical being the key word. Get a licence deal over the line to fund ava6k through phase 2 and we'll be sitting pretty. It's not complicated, but he seems insistent on undermining value, perhaps deliberately given his comments about needing to look cheap to get a deal done. Time will tell. Same conversation this time next year?

Agreed notrex. The fumbling bumbling waffle on the Vox interview summed up his capability in that regard. He said a while back he'd share the path to commercial success. He hasn't got a clue, he's making it up as he goes and this is what comes through in interviews as he flip flops and chucks in random damaging comments. The science, which is exceptional, deserves better.

Slacker, more fool you. Suggest you suck up the loss and move on. You'll get no joy on here repeatedly asking stupid questions.

JT, that was my interpretation. Given the efficacy they've had for that patient within an earlier cohort, it suggests the best regime might be low, more frequent dosing for an extended period of time. A constant battering for the tumour, but not for the patient.