Member Info for wyndrum

Mcs, ultimately as its all likely to be paid through share dilution its already free money.

The problem I think is that the trial was never designed to go on this long and as a result it through the trial funding plan into chaos resulting in the 50p raise a year or so later.

Once P1b is up and running and assuming the data is good then hopefully it will become academic.

The lack of current confidence in the SP is I think through the lack of P1b news. The assumption (right or wrong) is that without confirmation it has started, the market assumes it hasn't and this looks like a timeline slippage. which leads on to cash burn/ more funding etc etc.......

The lack of news makes the market nervous because the hiatus might be serious.

Some here are sublimely confident that nothing can remotely go wrong and see every time slip as just more evidence of how well everything is going. I think that view is in minority.

The worst part if I am right, is why AVCT don't clear this up with a more detailed explanation of what "expected imminently " means or meant. (Once you use subjective language then the market (correctly in my view), assumes that all is not as well as we/they were led to believe.)

Naturally, then you take the money off the table until its all a bit clearer because the first rule of investing is to preserve capital.

I didn't say he was coming back. I asked how you knew the reasons as to why he left.

Obviously you don't know, so just speculating, something you seem to be very much against in others, unless of course it suits your view of the world.

I think Cinders because some were probably libelling him.

"That’s exactly how King Al lost his job"

None of us know why AS left. Please do show the link. (Or is it just another guess to confirm an assumption to prove your AI responses?)

Chris, it does not go into administration only as long as it can keep raising money. It is debt free today. It is unlikely to be debt free 12-18 months time unless further funds come in.

I personally THINK it has one more go at coming to the market. but it is £200m in so far and at some stage it will get turned down if lenders don't think they will get their money back.

I have no idea whats going on with the 2 DX companies. Are they getting any larger contracts or just breaking even or going backwards. Have wages increased? have costs increased? Have any key staff left?

Maybe my intuition is wrong on this but I am so used to now, being disappointed with what AVCT say and actually what comes to pass, I don't have it in me any more to give them the benefit of the doubt. Ergo: I am doubtful about AVCT.

When it can be balanced with news that the markets deems as positive then I will happily reassess.

I would not be surprised if the DX division is valued between £9-15m but thats just me, I just think AVCT would not take that big a hit not because they can't afford it but it would probably harm the SP as it would crystalise the poor business acumen of the company and they want to look professional. (Plus it would continue the share payment scheme so the extra cash runway would not be (imo), lengthened enough to get them to the next stage of where they want to be without needing yet another raise.)

Yes a lot has changed in the last 12 months and yet also nothing has changed at all.

The 185p was based on AVCT saying it would be 4 cohorts and every dosing increase showed good results. Then out of the blue it went to 7 (except AVCT thought that most unlikely). So it was not hype it was based on data and the AVCT BoD.

I did not say P1a was invalidated. Just that given BP are not moving on P1a suggests it will all be down to P1b,, in which case that had better deliver because if it doesn't then all your calculations go out the window. You simply can't have it both ways: Either the science so far is so fantastic and de-risked and already worth billions in which case why hasn't somebody bought them out, or its not de-rised enough indicating it could still be a commercial failure which in turn undermines your AVCT already have billions worth of assets. Which one is it?

(Plus you have no evidence at all BP is watching. You assume that to simply enforce an assumption that you can't prove. Which is quite handy for you but is not remotely logical.)

Not sure you can blame covid, but nice try. Because again where is the evidence that it has take nearly 5 times as long when we all went back to work 4 years ago.

The cautious approach to dose escalation? Are you sure? It was taken out of AVCT's hands! Why was that do you think when the first 4 cohorts apparently showed everything they were meant to do? Could it have been that the data was mixed in terms of results, would that not make more sense? Why introduce 2WD unscripted and to what end has that helped going forward?

You know nothing about funding loss making companies, although the experience here should have opened your eyes, so simply ignoring it and pretending very disingenuously that AVCT hold all the cards is complete fantasy.

There last cash raise was 50p. Whats changed since then until now apart from more data and a 25% fall in the SP?

Why won't BP wait until the next cash raise halves the mkt cap again and saves further money or better still wait for to go into administration and then cherry pick whatever bit they want for whatever they want. The administrators won't care.

I am not saying any of this will happen but neither is it that fanciful either.

There is no objectivity to your scenario at all. It simply is a best case outcome that has several holes currently in it.

"Comparing an Expectation Pump to Reality – The 185p spike was driven by retail hype, not a concrete valuation event. The fact that we’re now 80% lower proves AIM trades on emotion, not logic. BP doesn’t make billion-dollar deals based on whether AIM is feeling bullish or bearish that day."

if you could just stop reciting mantra's then maybe a discussion could take place.

How do you know the 185p was driven by retail Hype? Why couldn't it have been people like yourself having done meticulous research and deciding that with the actual info available that that was a good price to buy? (God knows Hurst thought it was).

Or are you saying that you should only buy after BP as put in an offer? But that can't be right because you have saying for years what a great price AVCT is now, even though it keeps going lower.

You make, and even you can't mantra your way out of this, the repeated claim that BP are all over this stock and are watching it as we speak. So why have they not made their move yet? It can only be the data they have to hand which logically suggests they are going to wait for at least P1b. So what does that indicate about the veracity of P1a data? Logically it suggests it is not sufficient to put an offer in.

We are 4 and a half years into a projected 12 month phase 1a safety trial. To claim the depressed SP is down to day to sentiment is not borne out by the time that has actually passed.

Tomorrow an RNS could come out that transforms everything. That however is not likely.

P1b results data looks to be the next relevant info (although I am sure there would be quite a bump if they actually said dosing had started. Likewise confirming DX was oof the books could help but that would be more dependant on the price achieved.)

The lower the Mkt cap the harder it becomes to raise sufficient funds so as not to dilute the stock to oblivion.

You might feel the uncertainty generated by the lack of news and continued fall in the SP has no bearing on the future outcome of this stock. You could not be more wrong.

If you cannot recognise this increasing risk of the science ultimately being successful and shares holders getting shafted then you should ask you precious AI what conditions would have to occur for that particular scenario to play out.

" BP Watching"!

There is no evidence that this is so.

Aim is just a market place. It will be the same market place when the data for p1b is released, it will be the same market place if BP make an offer, it will be the same market if a cash raise comes in.

Your assertion that aim is only wrong when the price does not reflect your dream scenario is as logically flawed as just about every other assumption you have made thus far. (and to date been wrong about too.)

LFT is history. But please do tell, when it wasn't, did you at any time expect it to commercially fail prior to it failing? I ask because your reasoning here now, is the same: Look at the science, look at the data, look at the results, look at the ground breaking tech. Look at what happened. Do you ever take history and personal experience into account or do you permanently live in this dreamworld fantasy of trials never failing?

"The longer we wait, the bigger the deals. Simple as that."

That really is not true.

How about this?

Do you think the SP would be at this level if P1b dosing had started in Q3 or even Q4 last year?

What if the data suggests lengthier trial times? will that add to the value or detract from it?

Back in sept 23 the SP went to 185p on the expectation P1a was about to finish and P1b start.

So the extra data and the extra time taken to "prove" even more spectacular and exceeding all expectations, has seen the SP fall 80%

You are either ramping this trying to convince others to buy or your obsession in being correct is now blinding you to the most basic possibilities of your guesses not coming true.

BV, we have at last managed to get on the same page.

One of the many scenarios that some attempts at valuation simply ignore.

Sorry to distract you from Wood BB.

How's your predictions going there?

(I assume the market has got it wrong too?)

"Flabbergasted to say the least."

Why?

How many times do there have to be delays and uncertainty with a company with a 100% track record of never meeting a timeline and failing to commercialise their tech for the market to stop giving them the benefit of the doubt?

What is going on with the DX sale (spoiler alert: I think they can't sell it at a price that will won't make matters worse.)

Has P1b dosing started? You know, when CC said "Expected imminently", which was a month ago, you would have thought that would have been by now. And if you think the BoD would not be releasing that info to support the SP if they were, you are in cloud cuckoo land.)

Never mind the £20b valuation that can't remotely be discredited because its all facts.... (you couldn't make it up), what is more pressing is to remember what the SP was immediately before the last 50p cash raise. That was the discount needed to get it away.

What price now if they need to raise?

It's only ever and always about the money in loss making companies, because until they are profitable they are at the mercy of the markets and the conditions that happen to prevail at the time.

Still I am sure most here will label this is as fud so ignore it but maybe fpr some the penny will drop that the rose tinted brigade have never, ever, not once been correct in any sort of forecast, financial or otherwise pertaining to AVCT.

You need to think about that.

You can't pick and choose.

Good companies always survive a short.

Shorts are high risk, you only take them out either very short term or you can see structuarl problems.

Its part and parcel of the stocks and shares game. If you don't like it invest in different vehicles.

If AVCT are on to something then they will be fine. If they get shorted into a cheap take over thats down to poor management. Either way, shorts are very much "don't shoot the messenger" Magagement of well run companies that have a product worth something either are good enough to get through short term girations or if, financially exposed have to do deals and licenenses to protect to ultimately protect themselves.

I am not a fan of many loss making comapnies mangement.

The best i have come accross with business nous is ABDX, and that still has been a disater for LTH's however at least they are in with a chance.

I would stop eulagising CC, and be a lot more critiacal on timelines and coms. Its your money and your company. Many here are far to (imo) relaxed abour the financials. for the millionth time, for loss making comapnies until they tip over into profit ITS ALWAY AND ONLY ABOUT THE MONEY!!!!

That was my exact take away too Nonny

Interesting, thanks for the tip,

GLA

" It’s the incomplete information that also provides the investor with opportunity." Exactly Ben!

However both sides (I think) need to be explored equally, in fact the downside of the gaps in our info should take precedent as if you can, through thoughtful analysis reduce the likely hood of the downside occurring, then the risk reward will prove easier to assess.

When you buy any stock there is already an inherent bias to the upside and my experience has taught me to always focus on what could go wrong and never take the "expected" scenario for granted.

So yes, it becomes tedious, but no more tedious then relentlessly always seeing and reading the positive result when there are real pauses for thought which this stock/trial has provided all the way through with resignations, delays, unexpected cash raises and all the rest.

None of the trials and tribulations in hindsight may effect the overall result we all want for a variety of reasons, but to constantly dismiss the potential warning signs is just akin to putting your head in the sand.

But as always, we can all do what we want.

Well there is close of 1.37p which means it will almost certainly close below that tomorrow (although the "real" price is around 1.27p)

This will allow the RSI to unwind at least a bit from its nose-bleed heights of 96! without actually causing a real fall in the SP..... well, thats my best guess anyway....

No, I think I get it and I think the decision was clearly correct.

I could be wrong but my take away was that to clinically prove just safety and therefore have dox replaced with our tech (and ignore any potential by-product of efficacy), then it requires a much bigger data set and clearly the time and money needed for that is not worthwhile when the big fish to land is efficacy.

However, because there is no clinically proven safety profile due to the small size of the trial to date, then that to me might/would explain the lack of interest so far from BP.

(If I am still grabbing the wrong end of the stick I can only apologise.)

Hi sandy,

I guess my point was that if AVCt had already "proved" safety then why had not an offer already come in. The fact that it needs a much bigger data set, then to me, that explains why nothing has happened externally.

So we are (hopefully correctly), assuming on the very few patients who have taken part in the trial that the safety seen thus far will extrapolate out.

However there is a reason a much bigger sample is required. So although so far so good, it now comes down to efficacy and at least that's a bigger sample. However it then goes on to phase 2 and phase 3 to get larger numbers of patients involved.

Now clearly there is no money for that so it gets very interesting if an offer does not come in when P1b data is released.

Although to me it seems more likely than not that if efficacy is proven in the trial then avct will get bought out.

Quite how it will pan out is anybody's guess.

Thanks Sandy,

Because what she is saying is there is not enough evidence to claim that AVA6k is safer than dox.

So thats not proven at all.

So no proof of concept yet?

That makes sense as to why no offers, no Fda approval. etc.

Fingers crossed for p1b. no wonder they are taking their time. its almost like they are cherry picking exactly who to put on this part of the trial.

Who knew... Wait a minute....