Member Info for StarBright

Although some part of them may have been sold already.

Which "shorts" are these?

None disclosed. No borrowable stock. SB co.'s not allowing short positions.

How obvious can you get?

My speculative 401p buy order wasn't filled on the drop, despite the prints. Make of that what you will.

I have no way to interpret a release of this nature. Hopefully a poster with a professional background in geology/mining will be along at some point to offer their thoughts.

@barnetpeter. From the FY2020 TU; “The Company's cash position at 31 December 2020 was €101 million (£91.8 million), compared to €1.8 million (£1.6 million) at 31 December 2019 and €19.7 million (£18.0 million) at 30 June 2020”

In what way is this “dubious”..?

I bought in (small size) for the first time on Friday, and will look to add on further weakness this week. The current MCap of £300m looks to be well supported by the cash position + non-DHSC revenues (36m in q1).

It’s a good question. On balance I don’t think that DoE’s death should impact upon anything defined as a public health initiative. It seems unlikely - for example - that PHE will discontinue bombarding us with warnings about maintaining social distancing. The government has a moral imperative to advance public health initiatives; I don’t think that the constraints of purdah will apply to the testing programme as a result.

@RorkesDrift. I am always interested to engage with posters who are experts on company valuations. A few deliberately similar questions for you, to help explore the point you are making.

1. What (in % terms) is the gap between a & b in your estimation today? In other words, what (in % terms) is the execution risk discount implied by the current SP?

2. What % of the value of a an “LFD for Covid as good as we hope” is already priced-in at the current SP?

3. If AVCT were to announce on Monday that the LFD had failed testing and development was being discontinued, by what % would you expect the SP to fall?

What was the substance of your complaint/report Wallbrooke? What is it that market makers have done that could lead to the FSA bringing them to court?

Ouch. A reminder that these companies are very far from being “de-risked”, despite what you may read on these boards....

This - differing availability across venues - occurs because some platforms have access to more counterparties (specifically RSP's in this instance) than others. Barclays has turned this into a marketing feature they call "Price Improver" https://www.barclays.co.uk/smart-investor/investments/barclays-price-improver/

This is a genuine advantage to those using the better connected platforms (not just Barclays), who will see better execution as a result.

napthman1 - RNSing major news on Fridays (particularly Friday afternoons) is generally frowned upon by institutional investors, so it is "custom and practice" for companies not to release major news then - unless they have to, or they are looking to hide bad news...

If there's good news you generally want to get it into the market on a mid-week morning when all the desks (II's, MM's, brokers etc) are properly resourced so you can maximise the news value. Also because that is likely when market depth/liquidity will be best.

This document is being read and interpreted more thoughtfully by investors.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/private-coronavirus-covid-19-testing-validation/private-covid-19-testing-validation

Sub 25p there is a good balance of risk and potential reward here.

I added at 25p and 21p on the way down. Both purchases increased my average acquisition cost, and both have been annoyingly under water for a while. It’s good to see one of them turning green..!

The SP and - to a lesser extent - discussion here reflect the reality that at 250p the share might be materially under- or over-valued.

Applying (in a simplified way) the idea that an SP is the aggregate of market expectations; if 50% of investors believe Avacta is worth 100pps, and 50% believe it is worth 400pps then the market clearing price will be 250p. All those who believe in 100p will be convinced the SP is way too high, and all those preferring 400p will be saying it is too low. Neither group is “satisfied” by the current SP, hence the heated exchanges on this board.

Put another way, if 90% of investors believe *something* is going to happen, then 90% of the value of that something will be "baked in" to the share price before it is announced. This is how markets work. To be a successful active investor in the long run you need to find (& buy, & hold...) companies where the REAL odds of success are higher than the market perception.

Covid is likely to be with us for the foreseeable future. Our government have placed a massive bet on rapid-testing being required for meaningful recovery to be sustained. Companies like Avacta are well placed as a result. And Avacta has other opportunities that may - in time - generate huge value for shareholders. For these reasons I am happy to stay invested, and a marginal/opportunistic buyer below current levels.

Update. No TR1, so not a sale from a previous holder of >3%. Not one of the TR1 identified II's selling down, which is good news.

Remaining options:

1. A buy by a holder still below the 3% level
2. A sell by a holder who was originally below the 3% level

1 is perhaps the more likely explanation, as there probably aren't many qualifying candidates for 2.

It's a great time to sell your company to a US SPAC..! It is the fastest way to gain a US listing. Too many SPACS chasing too few deals, all under time pressure, means that some silly prices are being paid. SPACs are founded on the idea of taking private businesses to market; I don't know whether a US SPAC could make an offer for a UK quoted company as a way of moving a listing to the US. I will do some emailing to answer this...

If it is possible then rather than asking "is it us" every time testing gets media coverage, the same question "is it us" should be asked when SPAC's make announcements! The dream of a Nasdaq listing could be closer to hand than is generally thought...

Funnily enough, Matt Damon - the real Matt Damon - must be the only celebrity without a SPAC endorsement...

The re-costing exercise is likely to be important for progress in any direction. Some of the costs associated with major construction projects (ironic examples being steel and shipping...) have increased significantly in the last year. As have the complexities of “working with covid”, which has impacted the availability of specialist surveyors/engineers etc. I’ve seen this reported by other companies (notably miners) where I am invested.

So it is possible that there is a genuine delay. Or that the “required” output hasn’t been forthcoming and further work has been requested.

philw44 is spot on. It is to investment what the Daily Mail is to journalism. Just click bait.

@Bella6532; she not he. Melanie Ross.