George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video here.
3rd December 2020
Intention to award notices issued to successful and unsuccessful Potential Providers.
3rd – 14th December 2020
10 day Mandatory Standstill Period (in accordance with Regulation 87)
15th December 2020
Expected date for signature of the Contract
16th December 2020
Anticipated Contract start date
I realise that not everyone is on Twitter so thought I'd add a link to a rather positive chat between Myles and Ophidian as i know many of you, like myself, are always interested to hear what they think. Apologies to those who don't bother too much. https://twitter.com/Ophidian18/status/1331182485233950722?s=20
He also states "A number of rapid tests, such as the Healgen antigen tests, already work in prototype and are being evaluated to see if they’re suitable for home use — though the scale-up to mass manufacturing for some is running late. (To declare an interest, I have invested in some of these.)
"some of these" suggests more than one.
"scale up to mass manufacturing for some is running late)..sounds like Avacta's story to date.
It may well be he only knows what we know and is putting the pieces together as we are . But perhaps he knows more if you look at his summary (Richard Dobbs was a director of the McKinsey Global Institute. He is currently serving as a non-executive director on several boards, including the UK Statistical Authority.)
The exact picture is that 40 tests went into Phase 2. 9 have passed the criteria in this phase, while 31 have failed and been rejected. So far, 6 of the 9 have proceeded into and passed Phase 3a, with 5 now in Phase 3b and Innova in Phase 4. So there are 6 tests at advanced stages of clinical evaluation and 3 tests still to commence clinical evaluation. It's all in Section 5 Results: https://www.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/oxford/media_wysiwyg/UK%20evaluation_PHE%20Porton%20Down%20%20University%20of%20Oxford_final.pdf
They have just RNS a retort
@Hypermarlin. The second link looks the more interesting to me. Reading through sections 4 & 5, I think we can deduce that 130 tests became 40 tests after Phase 1 (pre-clinical) because they were sufficiently promising. The 40 tests then became 9 tests after Phase 2 (pre-clinical) with the remainder all failing. However only 6 of the 9 tests have so far gone on to Phases 3a, 3b and 4, and obviously Innova is one of these. The interesting part is that 3 tests out of the 9 that passed Phase 2 but have yet to go into Phase 3a...this is likely where Avacta is currently sitting and why Avacta Tweeted yesterday "We are preparing for the first clinical evaluation of the rapid antigen test and will update the market fully when that study begins".
You need to bear in mind that Sona has still not completed validation in Canada, so it would be most unlikely to get approval elsewhere until such time as it has. Avacta is clearly at an advantage if it is working closely with Gov.uk.
If anyone else feels as I do that Rorkesdrift and anyone of a similar style simply wish to dominate and disrupt what is often a decent forum for discussion, could I suggest that you first of all report each and every message that fits the bill and allow Admin to make a fair decision, then simply Filter all such posters and reduce the amount of exposure and replies that they get. Simple.
@foreverwaiting...I have previously thought the same about tech transfer, but from AS in recent RNS “ I look forward to further updating the market as we go through the next stages of manufacturing scale-up, clinical validation, regulatory approval and product launch." and “ I look forward to updating the market on progress in that regard, and will keep the market informed on the key next steps of clinical validation and regulatory approval." No mention of tech transfer notifications