Proposed Directors of Tirupati Graphite explain why they have requisitioned an GM. Watch the video here.
Isn't this suggesting that synairgen is less important to Omicron as it already is terrible at subduing the natural interferon whereas Synairgen would have been ideal for Delta as it would have replaced the bodies natural ability to respond?
Hoping I have missed something that you can correct for me...
Either way - Our trial data is against Delta which means that a) we should see strong results but b) Do we have to jump through additional hoops to show that this is equally valid for Omicron?
Full disclaimer: I am not invested here (lost plenty elsewhere though!)
I am interested in this board though so do follow from time to time… very interested in seeing if the placing can be stopped by enough shareholders voting no. Would be great to see any forward sellers get the shock of their lives and their need to buy back may help some recover here… although these same spivs can be buying in smalll amounts now to begin and cover themselves….
Out of interest: I have always thought that not voting was considered a vote with the BoD? If so do you need 50% of all shareholding to vote “no” or just 50% of those who vote to vote “no”. If the former then I imagine it is going to be very difficult but if the latter then I am excited to see if you guys make it happen.
Good luck.
I’m confused as I thought the whole novel thing about the activ trials was the seamless move from phase 2 to 3? In reality in what way has the timelines here been different to our own hospitalised trial for example?
Obviously we all wait for sprinter p3 results so for now Activ is a side show (although one day could prove to be very important).
I have to say that this does make me worry that they have been pulled not filled. far more likely that they were advertising so they were as far down the road as possible but still able to not financially commit before results. Maybe they no longer require these roles.....
On the more positive side they did only advertise when surely they had sight of a large amount of the data so perhaps the decision to remove vacancy is just entirely un related to the P3 results..... Anyone who thinks all 5 jobs on the same day hit peak application rate and/or all had offers accepted is either ramping or delusional.
With some of the settlement figures and sp valuations knocking around mixed with the confidence that we are in the box seat I have 2 questions:
1. Why is the mixture of likelihood and reward not reflected in the sp?
2. If Samsung were looking anything like having to pay out £900m why would they not make an all share offer for the company now and end it. Are you telling me the board would turn down a 5 X current sp offer for the business? The target price they set as their incentive suggests they don’t think we are going to be seeing £1+
I am pretty heavily invested here as a see near term upside and understand the logic of the huge claim but of it was realistic we would see that part baked into the sp by now I think.
completely agree with the OP here.
I just watched the video braced for bad news based on sp activity in last hour and my main takeout was that by 1st July we could get an RNS that basically tells us it is working.... Okay not on a big enough data set and not yet knowing the ideal dose but nonetheless it is working... I never expected that we would have a chance of being so close to that level of progress. LS clearly believed that the phase 1A data may be enough to get commercial partnerships (whether we would want them or not at this stage is another matter).
Obviously I recognise that the above is glass half full and that the fact we could get positive data so soon also means we could get negative data soon also.
AS also talked about LG Chem etc again. We have no idea how significant they are to our balance sheet (maybe find out a little more in April) but a few times he has suggested they are more significant than PI's factor. in our interim results from Sept in the "about Avacta" section it has this paragraph which I admit I don't understand the significance of but...
"Avacta has established drug development partnerships with pharma and biotech, including a research collaboration with ModernaTX, Inc. (formerly Moderna Therapeutics Inc.), a multi-target deal with LG Chem worth up to $400m, a joint venture in South Korea with Daewoong Pharmaceutical focused on cell and gene therapies incorporating Affimer immune-modulators and a collaboration with Point Biopharma to develop radiopharmaceuticals based on the pre|CISION™ platform. Avacta continues to actively seek to license its proprietary platforms in a range of therapeutic areas."
Even on the LFT front where I assume investors have angrily reacted to the idea we may have to get regulator approval again etc I don't think it was terrible. Clearly he is focused on PREcision and expects one day to have a small earner in LFTs but he made a remark about them being a commodity product suggesting it is a flooded market. There is not a flooded market when it comes to cancer therapies where multiple strength doses can be safely administered and that should excite all investors.
I think you are on cloud cuckoo lane if you are unhappy with that target. £3.50 as a base is more than double from here and they would need £4.50 to get their max. Well I think £4.50 is a pretty good target to aim for from here. Those who bought at £8 or £9 and have held all the way down that is not NCYT’s fault. They were being valued on a global pandemic which at the time was showing no abating this is a new world and if NCYT can be £4.50 a share post pandemic then I am pretty happy.
This reminds me of a company I once saw RNS they had won a huge contract…. Anyone who read beyond the first paragraph noted that the contract actually had a minimum value of £0!!…. Anyhow, not sure how many of you are familiar with this but that RNS pushed the sp up despite lots of PI’s voicing their doubts (most of them got called deramping idiots or were accused of shorting). Turned out though that the contract expired with 0 orders.
Can’t remember who that company was now but worth noting you get these unprofessional outfits who can’t write a professional RNS/market update for to save their lives. If I remember I will let you know but in the meantime that RNS this morning is the most clumsy and deliberate attempt to ramp the sp ahead of a placing I have ever seen.
ATB
Anyone else think it would have been nice to get the readouts from the initial dose?
We have inferred it is safe but it was a 90% dose so should be safe. I assume even though the primary endpoint is proving safety that we are also looking to see what dose got delivered to the tumor vs the other healthy organs... It would be great to be told that it successfully limited the release of the drug in parts of the body and then successfully delivered the full dose to the tumor?
BeContrarian - A late reply to yesterdays thread.
I gave it a tick as you are absolutely right. I do like to challenge my optimism as I find it healthy especially in a 12 month stretch where I have seen my PF decline in value from the dizzy heights of 2020 despite getting much of the positive newsflow I was invested for.
I have bothered to reply again this morning as I think a case in point has happened over at Avacta. By no means as commercial as P£ readouts but nevertheless if you had asked Avacta cheerleaders (FWIW I am invested less so than here but not a cheerleader on the board) pre this morning what rise the news would have produced then I think they would have predicted high double digit percentages.... and in truth if the same RNS had been released in 2020 or early 2021 I think they would have been right.
But this morning a major positive update has put 12% on the SP (for context a rumour last week that this would happen put nearly 20% on the SP). Like SNG it doesn't matter in the very long term as once commercialisation or buyouts occur they will lead to the correct valuation but the interim catalysts don't seem to be piling as much onto the SP as it used to.
Positive P3 results will absolutely confirm my conviction that we are a £10 per share company but I really doubt we will see even half of that on results day. I guess we wail to find out who is right (P.s. I hope its you!)
There is no doubt that results are taking longer (albeit not my much) than Richard expected as he initially indicated end 2021 at a time when the last patient dosed was going to be October (see a previous post of mine where I reasoned 3rd week of October). So we had a 3-4 week delay to dosing complete which meant we slipped into 2022 but if Richard believed 2021 was possible with October trial end then he must have privately believed Jan was the new likely month for results.
I therefore believe we are now delayed not because this was always the intended length of time but in fact because results are taking longer to publish than management had baked in...
... What I have no idea about is whether this is positive (preparing for the media scrum and EUA), negative (trying to find some positive slant on what are disappointing results) or irrelevant (was always going to take this long and it was unrealistic we would ever have got results in 2021 even if final dosing had occurred sooner).
What I do know is that I will be buying more if this touches 180/181!
Matml I agree with you and that is why I am invested. I guess I am saying that positive p3 results is just one of 5 or 6 events that gets us there and will be a big sp catalyst but too many on here are expecting another 5 bagger in one day which I’m this climate and with success more baked in than last time (imo) I just don’t think we will see the sort of rise people are quoting on here in that one event. I do however believe it will be the catalyst to a continued uptrend which (again imo) will lead to a buyout. My 950p target for next 12 months remains but I don’t think we will get to even half of that on p3 results day…..
….. unless the statistics are so overwhelming such as 0 out of 300 deaths in SNG group vs 20 out of 300 deaths in placebo. In that scenario I guess all bets are off.
Inhale reasoned something similar in the past but I will question again:
I don’t know why people assume that on the publishing of good news re P3 this will open at 500-700p? Even if I take the lower of those values it means the market is currently offering us 5-2 odds on a positive result which in percentage terms means the market is only rating a 40% chance of a positive result - yet we all (me included) are in the when and not if camp regarding a positive outcome.
So my point is that I am confused as on one hand we nearly all sit on the board almost assuming good results (with a little nagging fear we are wrong) yet expect something so likely to multiply the sp on its occurrence….
Personally I have a 950p target here but I think that will be achieved through a takeover. I think being granted EUA, announcing contracts and sales etc will all contribute to the drive upwards but positive P3 will in my opinion most likely add 40-50%. Don’t forget there will be people not as invested as we are in this that have already penciled in the RNS day as the day they sell and this will in itself have a drag on any rise.
All my opinion and obviously I would love to be wrong as I have significant £ here but also feel expectations should be managed.
Really frustrating there is no way of streaming the AGM assuming it Is not just voting… SP taking a small knock 30 mins in and paranoia kicks in that things are being discussed that only those there are party to. Hope not but still given the trend of these things now being streamed it would have been good to watch.
I have just re-watched Septembers presentation where RM showed recruitment in patients had grown to 100 a month across Jul & Aug and then dropped to 80 in Sept. He reasoned that they had expected growth to continue rather than decline and if it had they could have reported data by end of the year.
There were 120 patients left to recruit so let's say rather than 80 in Sept he had hoped for 120. That would have left 80 needed and if growth had continued then he may reasonably have hoped for 140 or so in Oct which means we would have recruited last patient in 18th/19th Oct (as we would have only required the first 80 of the 140).... So my back of a fag packet assumptions suggest that RM believed data pre Dec 31st was possible if we finished recruitment around 18th/19th October.... We actually finished on 11th Nov so 24 days later. It is therefore safe to argue that any time from 24th Jan onwards the results should/ve arrive/d assuming they would have arrived by year end had recruitment maintained the original trajectory.... I would suggest any delay from now is not a delay caused by the slowing of patient recruitment but rather a slower analysis of the data than anticipated... I have been quite vocal (more on Twitter than here) that Jan was unrealistic and Feb/March more likely but having considered the above I would now be very surprised if results are not in the next fortnight.
Also - the following slide outlined the steps they would take should results be good. The first step was apply for EUA in US which we assume they have not done unless confidential sharing of prelim results has taken place but I suspect EUA application goes on public record.... The steps after (bringing in 3rd parties, Looking at distribution etc) are all recognisable steps that they seem to be taking already...
I will now be joining the rest of you on eagerly refreshing my screen at 7.02am
I thought we already knew it worked? It’s contracts to sell it we are a little short of?