Member Info for Toukankahmoon

Gje306

Not disputing that but it’s greed at the end of the day. I’ve reached the point where if Avacta delivers on its potential I will have plenty of money so why risk more at this point? All I’m saying. Neither a ramp or deramp. Plenty of people come unstuck by being greedy.

Like some of you, at this time of year I carry out my portfolio annual review which informs my decisions on investing next year’s ISA tranche and perhaps calling time on some old investments.

This year is different because I didn’t invest up to my ISA limit I was waiting to see what would happen with Avacta. So I’ve run out of time and have £15k to invest before end of next week and then another £20k as we go into the new ISA year. Looking back over the last four years it is striking how poorly my investment portfolio has fared and it is all down to Avacta. Not just the drop in SP but also opportunity loss. I would historically expect to have made 12% per year on the money languishing in Avacta.

I have been considering Avacta because at current price it would certainly lower my average. But what is the point? Because if Avacta delivers on its potential I will be very happy with my return on my current investment. If it doesn’t then that’s another £35k down the drain. So this year I am investing elsewhere. It won’t reduce my Avacta average SP cost but it will reduce the proportion of my portfolio at risk in Avacta. And to be honest it will be a “monkey off my back”.

GLA

The Stock Market has surged over last few days. There are better places to put your money to get a return. Simple as that. Not rocket science

If Al went it would be a disaster

The science is not “bulletproof “

Bump

October sounds like a more likely timescale in terms of getting comprehensive trial data published

Benharper

And yet you think that the IIs and BP are as thick as mince for not seeing what you can see even though their combined knowledge eclipses yours and they probably have access to more data than you do.

Energy + CJ

You know I haven’t because there is still a potential huge upside.

The key is getting the dosing regime right so that the huge amount of dox in the AVA6000 has time to be cleaved before excretion of AVA6000 dilutes the levels in the bloodstream. Why can’t you grasp this.

Dosing at current C7 levels if all the available dox was being cleaved into the TME in all cases consistently then the results on the patients would be incredible and the SP would reflect that.

. . . and if that’s not enough the SP slowly sinks in the west.

If only some of the Pom Pom wavers worked for the IIs or BP. But they obviously only employ people with no knowledge of oncology, biochemistry or stock markets. WTF is wrong with the world

Icecool

Yes I know but we still don’t know how much. You don’t know how much. They do but they have only told us except in the 4 patients where efficacy has been proven.

It’s all in the dosing regime now to sort out efficacy.

Al has always maintained that AVA6000 is his to the end. I believe he is counting on proof of the platform to bring about an AVA3996 deal.

If only

Gje306

Yes I agree. I’ve been saying this since December and being ridiculed and abused in equal measure for thinking such unharmonious thoughts. Only positive interpretations allowed on here.

MorrisD

“ . . . stopped convincing many.” Really?

The dreamers on here are convinced nothing can go wrong. It works.

130

Well f**k me

“ However, the pK of ava6000 will be influenced by how fast it is converted and how fast it is eliminated by the body.”

Hasn’t someone else been banging on about this on here for months and just getting a ton of abuse?

Yes Timster even I can understand it and have cited it as a possible cause of why P1a has dragged on and precipitated the 2W dosing trials. But hey ho it’s much more fun to ignore it and call me a twat.

“Investigating low concentrations. . “ doesn’t sound promising to me.

At least we’ve stopped the £5 next week TO incoming claptrap 🤣

Ronny

Thanks. Yes I’ve seen that before obviously. Assume you meant slide 17.

Nonetheless it only results for 6 out of 40 patients.

Also what value are you taking as a therapeutic amount? Comparison is very difficult given dose is given in mg/m2 and biopsy results in ng/g. How have you converted this to reach your conclusion.

However one thing I note is that the AVA6000 dosage is nowhere near the MTD in the mouse trials.

Icecool

I am not saying AVA6000 doesn’t work. And today’s RNS has derisked my investment to some extent.

But I want to know how much dox is being cleaved. And you know I keep saying this.