The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
From the TG this evening.
Question
“Evening Dan. Are you attending the Boston event? Or is there now no need 🧐”
Answer
DG
“I want the best deal not the first deal ;)
News of a different kind tomorrow
Will be on DT at some point”
Make of it you what you will. TBH it doesn’t make much odds to me. I only have a very small holding having taken a big hit a while back. Water under the bridge for me now, but it would be good to see LTH’s eventually get some reward.
(DT apparently means Directors Talk)
PL75 I am increasingly cynical of the motives of the Twitterati and my post was slightly tongue in cheek, although admittedly I did top up this morning and if I were to plot my investments on a scatter chart they would look like a mega paint splash.
For the record I find Oph pompous, patronising and routinely rude to people.
Oh, I don’t know Wyn, there are some persuasive posters out there who people do pay attention to.
Take Ophidian’s tweets this morning. I know mentioning Oph on here is like a red rag to a bull to some on here (and I am not a fan) but he has a lot of Twitter followers. People can be influenced. I should know, I felt “the Twitter force” this morning and did a small impulse top up 😀. And yes, I only have myself to blame.
But I take your point and am bowing (dis)gracefully out of this thread so I don’t clog up the board.
https://x.com/ophidian18/status/1702225289936240905?s=61&t=BBb2UcjLDTXOFIzJM-vM6A
Wyn, I agree that news flow is the biggest SP driver.
However, the likes of TW & Truant, with for example, the placing rumour, death spirals etc clearly want to negatively influence the SP for financial gain. Ditto the daily Twitter brigade, with their trading pots, who will ramp and then sell on the rise.
Morning Wyn, my post was directed at those that manipulate on Twitter with agendas and ulterior motives. Whipping up expectations (or trying to sow doubt) and profiting at the hype they have created. I am becoming very cynical.
You should enjoy this article EC published earlier this week. Lots of mentions of Parsortix, which is shown in a very favourable light. Well worth a read.
https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/24/18/13930
Courtesy of the ADVFN board:
“Apologies if these have already been seen, but the below is some broker feedback after the results. I liked the concluding paragraph in the Proactive article: “Both Berenberg and Jefferies see a company on the cusp of tapping into a multi-billion-dollar market, making ANGLE a name to watch in the liquid biopsy space.”
https://www.trinitydelta.org/research-notes/revenue-building-and-growth-opportunities-are-developing/
https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/1025805/angle-plc-making-solid-commercial-progress-1025805.html?rel=scroll
Thanks GMCC regarding the tweet ref Dr Tap presenting in Seoul tomorrow.
Have you managed to find a link? All I can find is this:
https://kmsts.org/board/notice/1434
Was it this one Moab?
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/AGL/research-into-role-of-immune-cells-in-cancer-z483zgm8ti2ewfs.html
Morning Moab, I am no expert, but AN has said on numerous occasions that the different approaches are complementary. Take, for example, the conclusion of this article, this is a partial quote:-
“It is likely that both CTCs and ctDNA will have complementary roles as cancer biomarkers and might be used in parallel for earlier lung cancer diagnosis, prediction of treatment responses, or detection of disease progression. Taking all of these arguments into account, we consider the real victory in this “war” is the genuine possibility these technologies create for translating the concept of precision oncology into clinical practice. Liquid biopsies represent an important advance in the management of lung cancer in which CTCs and ctDNA are both expected to play complementary roles based on their relative strengths and limitations.”
https://tlcr.amegroups.org/article/view/10106/html#:~:text=From%20our%20point%20of%20view,as%20use%20in%20vivo%20studies.
I tend to agree Phantom and this has been discussed before on this board. I have definitely had a Déjà vu feeling.
It has also cropped up on other boards. I has a scroll back. This post might interest you. It could be that there is on the horizon an assay that combines both CTC’s & ctDNA:-
There was an interesting AGL poster presentation last year. From the RNS - “ANGLE believes there will be significant demand from biopharma companies for an assay that combines ctDNA and CTCs. The workflow presented, demonstrating effective CTC isolation utilising the Parsortix system with concurrent removal of plasma for ctDNA analysis, puts ANGLE in a highly competitive position in this emerging arena.”
I thought AN’s comment at the Investor Meet presentation was interesting “In time our clinical lab expects to be offering DNA sequencing of both CT DNA and cell DNA from CTCs”
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/AGL/parsortix-poster-presented-at-islb-meeting-ren2khp18ipwwgm.html
Thanks JT and I agree. What I don’t agree with is the way RAH states it in such a manner that it comes over as fact. It isn’t. It is, as you say a (likely) possibility.
Ditto with the commencement of C6, which RAH has at the 20th June. Anecdotal feedback from the AGM (in the offline chats), was that at the time of the AGM (28th) the first patient hadn’t been dosed, but that it was imminent. But of course, no one knows for certain because we have had no formal confirmation.
I don’t know if this helps Kong, but you may find some information in the clinical trial detail.
https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04969835