Member Info for RegulatorUK

"I cant understand odx has a better result sp not reacting as it should by, Avct has less accurate result and sp is flying, can anyone explain in a simple sentence as i found it odd"

Avacta has a high percentage of AIM Happy Clappies...

"In many occasions news has been brilliant then the share price does basically not slot then retraces I think the market just do not trust Odx bloody feed up"

Why don't you sell up then and save us all your whining?

"The paper is from the 1st of Feb, is it odd that Abingdon waited 2 weeks to release the report? "

Just to pick up on this point, I'm not surprised. The RNS' come the day after Unshackling Day... smart play by Abingdon/UK-RTC and ODX I think. Release the good news when you're free from DHSC restrictions on your ability to sell.

"AVCT Initial evaluation has been published... moving to clinical trials.
I think a few rainbow chasers/traders will be heading there for a while, maybe jump back here later.
@Regulator/Tecbadger - You're more experienced in these things than I am... how long for clinical trials do you think? End of March?"

It's another one of Avacta's special confections. It's basically rehashing the last update. They'll be lucky to get full clinical trials done by the end of March but they may just get it over the line with Mologic's support.

One of the things I really dislike about Avacta (and I say this is a shareholder) is the bull**** RNS they keep coming out with. Constantly overpromising and underdelivering...

... unlike Colin and ODX.

"The link below if from the bottom of the RNS and seems to be the pre print of the research paper the data is from. The paper is from the 1st of Feb, is it odd that Abingdon waited 2 weeks to release the report? Can anyone translate into layman's terms?

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.30.21250777v1.full.pdf

I don't fully know what I am looking at with this paper, it seems at first glance that the surescreen antibody was a tiny 1 % more sensitive."

You're confusing specificity with accuracy. The bit you quote is talking about specificity.

Specificity is one component of the accuracy calculation which is:

Accuracy = Sensitivity × Prevalence + Specificity × (1 - Prevalence)

Overall, the AbC19 was the most accurate of the four LFTs tested.

"Avacta test which we have either completed TT or in the process of completing TT, looks set for a CE mark and worldwide sales"

Err... not quite. The Avacta RNS is quite a confection but the key point is they still don't have a validated test. It may be validated by the end of Q1 2021.

"Key point is

an ELISA antigen test that determines the concentration of COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) antigens in human blood,
saliva or swab extract sample thereby identifying an individual with an active COVID-19 infection

Our own test in collaboration with mologic!!!

Is this the test to be produced for the government?? Would make sense."

Oh FFS stop spamming the board with irrelevant drivel!

The RNS you linked to is the old RNS for the ELISA antibody test - which ODX has announced it is no actively longer pursuing.

You then follow up with a post about an ELISA antigen test which doesn't exist, when everyone is investing in developing antigen LFTs.

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to post and remove all doubt".

"Now I’m totally lost thought all the evaluations had bee done for the antibody test last year hope this isn’t there best shot at a ship steadier a sample of 30 people where did they carry it out in the new stare off the are corridor come on Odx"

This is the evaluation by PHE that was undertaken partly as a result of the criticism by the likes of Deeks. This evaluation blows Deeks et al out of the water and green lights purchases by HMG and sales to third parties.

"Shall we revert to discussing rifles again? Think you got the wrong fella, not sure talking about rifles on this platform is the way to go."

Sorry - it must have been someone else on another thread... We were discussing what we'd spent/were going to spend some of our investment earnings (or in my case prospective earnings) on.

Chuggers!

How was the birthday hangover?

"Sorry if already posted:

https://twitter.com/MylesMcNulty/status/1361300453288517634 "

Not sure how this is really relevant to the ODX BB... but I will not be holding hold my breath that the Avacta TU will provide any further clarity around progress on their test development beyond what is already known.

"Please can anyone let me know the potential risk / downside of investing in BRH.

Many thanks"

You'll get ****ged off by butt-hurt RMS shareholders...

"I don't have the education most have on here, my grammer is pretty crap,..."

*Resists the temptation* ;-)

"...but I can track any animal including a human for days and days and you would never die on 3 week bush outing with me"

Shall we revert to discussing rifles again?

"Regulator you're being a pain, put it simply for you;

- BBI claimed the UK-RTC had an order for 1 million in a post on their site, the post was quickly pulled down, I questioned this with both Walbrook and Colin, both denied THE ORDER, doesn't matter the semantics, if the order was for BBI or for BBI via UK-RTC, or Abingdon, it was the order period that was denied.

latterly we found out that wasn't true and the UK-RTC in fact did have an order."

No - they didn't. You're simply putting an adverse inference on what was actually said... and one must wonder why you insist on doing that.

"Regulator I'm afraid it is you that is incorrect"

Ummm... your own quote backs up what I said: "...the Consortium recently received an order from the UK Government for the first million COVID-19 AbC-19 TM tests."

Not BBI as you inferred in your initial post: "I believe they assured us, swore blind infact that BBI did not have a contract for 1 million tests. "

And the UK-RTC did have an order for 1 million tests, via Abingdon ( https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-invests-in-uk-developed-antibody-tests-from-uk-rapid-test-consortium ):

"Chris Yates, CEO of Abingdon Health, who led the UK-RTC, said:

The UK government order of the first one million tests is an endorsement of this UK-designed, developed and manufactured high-quality rapid diagnostic test. It is a triumph of British business and a breakthrough for UK life sciences.

We have ramped up production since the start of August and will be ready to deliver the first tests to the government by early October. I would like to express my thanks to all my Abingdon Health colleagues for their tremendous support and hard work in achieving this milestone."

Walbrook did not say that the UK-RTC did not have an order - they said "I’m afraid the BBI Solutions statement was released in error and was incorrect. The statement has been withdrawn and should be disregarded."

That is factually correct.

"@Chuggley , would you base your investing decision on anything Walbrook tell you, I believe they assured us, swore blind infact that BBI did not have a contract for 1 million tests. or be exact the wording they used "I’m afraid the BBI Solutions statement was released in error and was incorrect. The statement has been withdrawn and should be disregarded."

They were correct. BBI didn't have a contract - the UK-RTC did, via Abingdon.

"International Entry Diagnostics"

You what?!? What are you blathering on about?

Food intolerance is not an LFT. It's a lab-based process.

"Regulator, whatever. They had to sell or they will lose money. Because they know that they are soon going to exceed their entitlement to those advantages. They know they have landed a massive contract. That's the significant factor from shareholders perspective."

Lots of assumptions in that post...

"It's illegal to operate the EMI scheme if you are over £30 million Regulator. So they can't be over it but obviously they could be very close."

Err... no. Once a company fails to meet one of the EMI criteria, then the relevant parties has 90 days to dispose of their shares in order to maintain the tax advantage. If they don't, any CGT will apply as per normal.