RE: GREAT TIME TO BUY AVCT1 May 2020 01:53
Kbizt
Your summary is flawed throughout and a complete misrepresentation of the investment case laid out by Myles McNulty. An intentional misrepresentation in my view but any reader can decide for themselves.
Firsrly, he references $ 100's of Billions target market for AVCT's tests, not just $ 100 Billion.
This is as a result of the renowned US economist stating only yesterday on the BBC that $ 100 Billion will need to be spent on tests in the US alone.
That $ 100 Billion represents the 22 million tests a day that the economist stated is necessary to regain the US economy. 22 million tests a day equates to 8.3 billion tests a year, which dismisses your other claim that the $ 100 Billion is based on tests costing hundreds of $'s. Actually, it would equate to tests costing just over $ 12.
Additionally, the US population only represents 20% of the population in advanced economies, which is 1.5 billion, so $100 Billion spend in the US would translate to many hundreds of $ Billions globally.
You then state $25 Billion sales , MM didn't write that at all.
Then you write earnings from sales $ 5 Billion and then attempt to reduce it further by suggesting a 15 % royalty on your made up $ 5 Billion earnings.
MM wrote he anticipated a 10% royalty on all sales.
So, in your example of $ 25 Billion sales of the AVCT test, this would equate to $ 2.5 Billion to AVCT in royalties.
The distribution costs would be with Cytiva and the intellectual and commercial rights belong to AVCT.
You then state a 50% COS, or chance of success. MM didn't write that either, he wrote 90 - 95% COS.
Even so, if they were earning $ 2.5 Billion per annum ( and by the way, that same US economist stated the $100 Billion on tests would need to be spent for years, to stop the US economy from losing $ 6 Trillion per annum in revenue), a COS would be irrelevant and not diminish the market cap valuation, and the market cap would be multiples of their royalty earnings.
In short, the £200 million market cap does not represent the potential of having a good portion of a half a $ Trillion ++ global market.
In the same way, your purposefully naff summary does not represent the summary given by Myles McNulty.