Member Info for Sangijuelas1

Also take Blue Prism. An RPA pioneer that stopped investing to try to become profitable (didn't work) allowing UI Path to achieve 5 times their annual revenues partly by winning Prisms clients.

So what could have been a UK tech success story ended in a damp squib with Prism sold for £1bn.

Yeah it doesn't look good for them right now.

They must be doing something right if AJ Bell feel the need to launch a competing product.

If you have a portfolio like this you are going to get winners and losers.

Markets are a bit bipolar sometimes. They can go quickly from wild optimism to abject pessimism. No doubt the truth resides somewhere in between and can also be found in the right companies.

No doubt there are some excellent value stocks. But probably others that will suffer from the monumental changes the world is going through.

The UK may offer more conservative valuations to their stocks but then we have not birthed and grown a company like Google, Apple, FB, Amazon, Tesla, Illumina or Moderna.

I mean look at Illumina. Trading at $40bn but would be a fair bit more if it weren't for the biotech crash.

Illumina is built on technology developed by the UK company Solexa, which had to list on Nasdaq to get anywhere, and Illumina bought them for $600m.

Pretty much the same story with Arm. UK investors thought they had hit the jackpot when they sold it for a $1bn or so.

Incredible progress is being made from the investments coming out of US funding.

It is mind blowing that thanks to gene sequencing technology and RNA vaccines we could have been getting dosed with Moderna within days of sars cov2 genome being analysed.

Something that would have taken 5 years was available in days and it seems to now be generally considered that the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines were more effective than the AZN adenovirus one using more traditional methods.

So by our cautious witholding of funds we end up with a false economy it seems

There were reports last week that some investment banks have added the risk of major social upheaval in US, Europe to their business continuity planning.

I think they are freaking out a bit unnecessarily. I lived in Southern Spain with the fallout from the 2008 crisis. Even in a country with a strong socialist tradition there was little upheaval apart from the 15-M movement, which fizzled out other than leaving the Podemos party as a legacy. Most people just stayed at home watching TV.

I do have concerns about the US social situation and the rise of MAGA candidates who all seem to be trying to outdo each other with their extremism. CPAC are actually holding an event in Hungary talking about how the US needs to follow an authoritarian path like Hungary. Yet I think the US tradition of individualism may lead these extreme right wing figures to devote themselves to fighting each other for the crown of fuhrer or caudillo.

Also I don't like the volatility on US markets. It seems reminiscent of the months before the 1929 crash as per J K Galbraiths account of it.

Also what was lost in the Target and Walmart figures was that people were shifting spending to service industries like travel and entertainment.

I think the portfolio is well positioned and sufficiently diverse in terms of sectors and stages of development to withstand shocks.

Hardware crypto wallets
Menstrual and female health app
Leading Supercomputer candidate
Tech that is in high demand from banking giants
Company preparing for first European SpaceX style launch
Concert and travel app
Radar imaging for floods with military applications
Synthetic data provider
Medtech diagnostics already selling globally global market
Pay as you go insurance
Distributed computing power for simulators and metaverse

As for valuations the Edison report emphasised the conservatism involved in the estimates.

Yeah I don't think MV did participate. They issued an RNS acknowledging there had been a raise.

No doubt the Revolut valuation was overcooked at the time.

I just think Freetrade and Klarna are not the best indicators of VC funding opps as Thought Machine, Form3 and Aiven demonstrated.

Funnily enough if Affirm had as many customers as Klarna claim to have they would have captured double the spend on the app.

Affirm 11m users and $15bn
Klarna 100m and $80bn

Klarna is mentioned in the article. They are due to take a 30% cut to NAV but they are after raising $1bn.

I invest in Affirm which is also in the BNPL sector and at a similar growth stage. However, in their last quarterly they said they think they will not need to raise any more capital and anticipate being profitable by next year. So maybe this is a Klarna problem who will also be suffering from the recent collapse in Affirms value.

Chrysalis Investments are a bit like MV albeit with a much more concentrated portfolio. Their SP has suffered and they have written down NAV mainly due to their massive Klarna allocation. Interestingly, their SP has continued to drop in recent weeks despite their portfolio company THG attracting at least 3 bidders.

Hopefully we have enough companies in the portfolio that are profitable and have less need to raise capital. I mentioned Hadean the other day who haven't raised since 2019 yet seem to be doing some very impressive stuff. Revolut CEO was saying he thinks they won't need to raise more before future listing.

It is a very good sign that the likes of Form3, Aiven and Thought Machine have had their later funding rounds led by the likes of Goldman Sachs, Eurazeo and Temasek.

So for me it seems a bit of lazy analysis in the FT article judging the state of VC funding valuations on 2 companies, Freetrade and Klarna, who can be seen as among the biggest casualties of the tech rout in Robinhood and Affirm.

It seems that the market does not believe the MV NAV of 924p and expect a major reduction. I remain optimistic and I think market fears about a deep recession with major social upheaval is excessive.

A bit of doom and gloom here about private tech valuations.

Not sure Freetrade is the best bellwether given the scepticism around broker platforms like Robinhood.

MV seem to have participated in the latest raise.

https://www.ft.com/content/933897a3-1a7b-447e-8d4e-48759fdbd151

Nope I expected and hoped for 2-3 partial responses from each group.

That would have been enough.

There's an interview with DP from early last year or late 2020 where he raises the possibility of early approval.

One of the patients from Part A had a 100% tumour reduction but was hoping for more like that from Part B and no doubt 4D were as well

Not really if there's urgent unmet need such as people sadly dying from their cancer as there's no treatment available
Some cancer therapies like Keytruda get conditional approval from P2 data. Still have to do P3 and report 5 year survival but you can start marketing the drug.

Are you unable to read and comprehend what I posted?

I said RP was right but explained that my investment case here had depended on results good enough to get accelerated approval or massively increase the chances of a Merck buyout.

So they weren't good enough for me as I am not prepared to wait another 2-3 years for 4D to complete a trial and put an approval application in.

Thanks for pointing that out RP.

I had missed it and it is useful to know.

What I am getting at by referencing the lack of tumour reduction is how I thought that if say 3 of the 16 had partial responses it would have made a case for accelerated approval.

Instead it is confirmed that a pivotal trial would be necessary with possibly disease control rate as an endpoint for approval. He also mentions overall survival as another and that involves at least 12 months to get results.

So more trials, more time. Responses would have also made the case for a Merck buyout much clearer.

I listened to it twice and I didn't hear that.

Are you sure?

None of the scientists 4D paid to appear posted anything on Twitter about it and they are all fairly active

No RP

I am saying that the wording on clinical trials is vague as it references signs of anti tumour activity.

Efficacy on the Second Endpoint of tumour reduction would have been much stronger indicator of success.

They also said the reason they were holding back 0518 data last year was because they wanted to release biomarker data at the same time.

But they didn't release any biomarker analysis.

So you don't know. OK thanks for clearing that up.

Imagine investing in a biotech when you have not got a clue what's going on.

What was the Primary Endpoint achieved Scrambler?

They're unlisted so they don't have anything on LSE

So I have to come here and keep things honest

Still waiting to find out what the Primary Endpoint was and why it was not really very meaningful..

Thanks to getting out here I was able to snap up a bit of

Graphcore
Thought Machine
Form 3
Endomag
and Aiven

at a very good price for a 5 year hold

I actually detached from my emotions and made a cold, clinical decision that went against my inner feelings.

I see a lot of appeals here to people to just believe, to have faith, which sound to me a lot more based on emotion than a reasoned position.

You lot believe that it's wonderful that 0518 achieved the Primary endpoint for RCC. Yet how many of you know what the Primary Endpoint even was? And what that means for the chances of getting the Keytruda combo approved?

I have no regrets and have benefitted from the opportunity to deploy cash elsewhere in the current extremely volatile markets that I would have been unable to do if I had been trapped in 32-36 up down trading here.

Let's see which of the below people think is true

I am someone who was long then sold at a loss to then go and short.

Or I am someone that doesn't actually know how to initiate a short nor is particularly interested in doing so. Someone that buys long with a 3-5 year time frame. Invested here for 4 years.
Someone who did frequently provide a positive outlook on the company resulting from a lot of in depth research. And, who felt that having seen 2 additional factors (the most recent 0518 results and the misrepresentation of cash available from loan funding) on top of other more minor orange flags, a previous assessment of the company prospects was changed.
Following on from this a difficult decision was made to sell at a loss and informed others that my view had changed.

If you go back through my posts you will see me say on various occasions that the 0518 results would be key as to whether this was a goer or not.

I also emphasised 2 other factors that have nothing to do with 4D. The biotech bear market and the daily manipulation of trades by shorters made possible by the low volumes.

So you can believe the conspiracy theory or you can see that someone who felt that their previous optimistic view was wrong and was admitting to a mistake.

I mean I think some people seriously need to grow up a bit.
Every day brokers and fund managers revise their views on companies.
So it shouldn't really be surprising that people that post here do as well.

Well you can ignore 28jaczar HCW are just a broker.

Most biotechs are involved with them