Member Info for wyndrum

About 2 months ago... :0))

Well, this all seems more "imminent" than previously. The next 12 months should be (cliche alert) Transformational!

The big plus is the tiny market cap. if any of these deals transform into reliable sales then the rerate should allow good capital increase from here. (imo dyor etc etc.)

BITL,

I don't think they have any choice.

The more they try to raise in one go to extend the cash pathway means bigger risk for the lenders.

As we have seen both in the current SP repayment scheme and indeed the last cash raise. The funders do not want to hold AVCT stock. So the shares are sold immediately. In the 50p RI there was a time element allowing the shares to be sold before the PI's got a sniff. A quick 10-15% profit was made.

This suits AVCT and the lender(s) just fine.

Again I think (just my opinion), but AVCT is much more hand to mouth and not as in control of their own destiny as is generally assumed here.

When you realise they had to extend the trial beyond 4 cohorts, the fact that the trial seems to have ended in the UK and now and been transferred to the US (why?) They have no control over FDA approval process. The fact that P1b seems to me to at least be behind schedule, all point to, not a chaotic process, but one that is unpredictable based on a reactive approach to the data collected.

The implications to cash flow and burn are equally hard to predict.

(Personally I will (pleasantly) surprised if when the next update comes that DX is indeed cash neutral as It will be one of the only time predictions that will have ever been met. )

Assuming P1b data is as good as we all hope, then what's next? is it, due to the relatively small sample then on to phase 2 on a bigger scale or do we bypass phase 2?

Or hope that that it will trigger a BP buyout?

(sorry, enter button got pressed early)

And that's fine because I bought the stock understanding my limitations. and for the reason its irrelevant.

I bought the stock at one price expecting it to rise over a relatively short time frame. I always fined it slightly arrogant when people buy this type of volatile stock for the long term, imagining they can foresee all the trials and tribulations that will occur and still be confident that the company will still succeed years in advance.

So this has not performed as an investment as I expected. I will be delighted to get out of this stock at a profit but see this has quite tricky hence I trade where I can to try and pinch a 10-20% profit here and there to mitigate any overall loss. I have fortunately succeeded in this endeavour and can afford to see this play opt but 150p (as a target) at the moment would do me fine if the ultimate payoff is still may be 5-10 years away, assuming (which I can't), that all goes well.

AVCT, I understand that I have no idea what is needed as a chemist and a scientist to develop what AVCT are attempting to do. I have a simplistic understanding in a very broad brush way based on the interviews and RNS's etc what is going on.

Given that and most of all, given I know that companies will only tell you what you want to hear, that all of us have no idea what problems are being encountered behind the scenes in trying to develop this tech.

And thats fine because I bought the stock

Anybody asked AI how long it will be before a universal cancer vaccine is ready?

3 years? 5 years?

"Would it help to remove this uncertainty? For sure, but if it comes with a more comprehensive this week or next that’s perfectly fine too."

And if it doesn't? Will it actually sow any seed of doubt or will you just carry on waiting?

I know I am broadly out of step with most here so I know it gets irritating but I don't actually do it for the sake of it.

Why make the RNS uncertain in the first place with subjective time projections?

Why not say "we will RNS when P1b dosing starts, which we expect in the next 10 days as we finalise the last patient", (or paperwork or what ever)

As I say I expected it by the end of Jan. Maybe it has started, but I have no evidence that it has, so i assume it hasn't yet.

That makes me think rightly or wrongly, that the original "expected imminently" start words were in fact carefully chosen and that there is something holding it up. I don't quite know what other conclusion to draw when its been nearly 9 months since P1a finished.

It just felt, to me, like it was a holding statement to buy some breathing space/time to sort out a glitch.

"Well you yourself are making an assumption that p1b hasn’t started. All we have is this from 16th Jan rns:"

Well, we get an RNS to say its about to happen so, yes I would expect confirmation when dosing ACTUALLY starts as a result I am assuming dosing hasn't started.

And again no one has said what they thought the words "..expected imminently..." meant. And I think I know why. I think posters here also don't know what timescale to put on it based on the past history of the company and don't want to look foolish. Personally, if it was truthful I would have expected WITHIN 2 weeks. But as I outlined at the time, it was the use of 2 words to allow for delays without being contradictory to what was said, with obviously the first one being the biggest get-out should things take longer than were are led to believe.

Again fair point against Harl and thats a more qualified response than the original one-liner.

thats another thing Chris, what mistakes did the previous CEO make?

I don't know, do you?

Was it buying DX? I guess thats the most likely reason and maybe he would not countenance it to be sold and the board voted him down so he had to go? But if it was about to be cash neutral as RNS'd in the accounts before going on to being profitable, then why sell it? (or rush to sell it?) Plus could he have made that decision without the boards backing?

Was it the 50p cash raise? not sure as that would also needed advice from outside sources (NOMAD) as well as the BoD

The one that nags at me the most was his constant misrepresentation of the tests and trials, because all that could be levelled at him was over egging the data. Which makes me stop and think.

"Yes some dilution along the way but not enough to warrant that disconnect considering all the progress and the move to prevent past mistakes being repeated via a new CEO."

So, it does not warrant the disconnect ... yet here we are....somethings going on....

(Plus I am not impressed with one payment being made in cash by the by CEO and then none others. No idea what that was all about other than to speed up the potential necessity for further dilution.)

It will all be revealed in good time.

"For me the time to buy is when everyone has become jaded and is expecting the worst… that’s when we start seeing surprises to the upside."

what, like HARL?

Those i think fair points Chris, but the underlying assumption here seems to be: "....buy now before the market realises just what a different stage we're now at."

Its always the market does not know what we do.

How does the thought process change if the assumptions is the market knows more than we do? (or at the very least as much as we do.)

The SP spiked from around 100p to 185p when it seemed there was an expectation of the last 4th cohort finishing. Since then it has declined to where we are now.

Now it has finished, P1b dosing has not even started 6-9 months after P1a completed. Given the length of time to get to here, will p1b be completed this year? based on past history it now seems less likely to me. (I expected it to be the summer of 2025.)

Thats the whole point. There for me is too much contradictory signs disputing the worth of the company.

Of course I think on balance its worth more than the current market valuation, but it is imo impossible even to assess a ball park figure given the range of options.

Complete failure is one bookend

100% sucess is the other.

I am not yet convinced complete commercial failure is off the table. There is no offer, no license deal, no FDA approval. SP remain rooted, trial is going at a snails pace, and although not directly related, can't sell what by now should be a profitable DX division of the company.

So I am cautiously optimistic but if some one offered 500m right now I would take 150p per share.

I'm not mad on analogies, as rarely do they help but if I responded to your one, AVCT are 5 -0 down at half time and have sent on their new expensive signings to somehow get a result.

I obviously do think there is a value expectation otherwise I would not have stuck with this stock so long. (I would not however had I known how long the journey was likely to be and continues to be, against the BoD's original timeline predictions. (It was the first bio-pharma stock i got involved on and it was all meant to happen within 6-12 months for the LFT, and when that dragged on to ultimate failure then the trial was on the go so I decided to hold for that being wrapped up by 2023 at the latest. Now its 2028-32, take your pick. There is always the carrot of a buyout at any time that used to while away the months).

Time is definitely part of the investment judgement criteria.

To me the criteria is: (given its all judgement).

Why buy at the price available? (If you think its likely to go lower you wait)

When will you sell? (you should have 2 prices. One how much loss are you prepared to accept if you are wrong and it falls. And 2, what price will you sell if it goes up. (without that you can't see what the return will be.)

How long do you expect it to get to your expected selling price? Again without a timeline you cannot judge the value of the expected return and measure it against alternative investment vehicles or other stocks.

I understand if all goes better than expected that the criteria may be altered or reappraised to profit further.

I am critical of AVCT because they have a history of commercial failure. (Thats ok, thats the market they chose to fish in and no one had to buy their stock.) But it is a minus.

They have not seemed well managed previously but I am not sure simply because I can't see behind the screen. We criticised their PR dept. What if the legal team said, "we have nothing we can actually legally point to yet to publicise"? Want to hear that?

We criticise their "deal-maker". What if he is working his nubs off, but no-ones interested? Want to hear that?

There are delays/extensions to what was previously communicated. If it was because there was ambigious data do we want to hear that?

Could be that AVCT have been extremely well managed to keep as many on board as they have. Who knows?

What I do know, is that the SP continues to fall/flat line and no one is building a stake. The old CEO was sacked for what? the new one does not seemed to have made a difference in getting this to market any quicker nor arresting/improving the SP. Has not got any big hitters to buy the stock and so far no news on the sale of the DX division.

Thats why I found the talk of this multi, multi billion valuation spurious to say the least.

We all (apparently) know its high risk, and this stock could not be riskier imo, so I would have just imagined that talk of the future could be more balance when someone id claiming

Because the data that is constantly thrown off seems solid. P1a notwithstanding the extra cohorts, has continually confirmed the safety and at face value good signs in some case of efficacy too. All the noises made in interviews with the AVCT people is of confident expectations. The pipeline and pre clinical results look as ever, good, if not spectacularly good.

AVCT, my point is (and I agree with your central point in your post), that while those 2 figures are the fundamental part of the investment case the 3rd leg of the stool is a the timeline.

If, in this case as an example , the SP is resolutely refusing to rise whilst at the same time the valuation part of the equation seems more likely than ever to arrive, then that to me is of far more importance to figure the likely reason(s) for this than anything else.

It also coincides with longer timelines than previously indicated. So for me 2 legs of the stool are under pressure.

I could not even illicit a reply here to when CC said dosing was expected imminently (mid Jan), as to how long we though that would be.

My view was that was a red flag tosign posting further delays.. Its now close to a month later and I am not aware its started yet?

It seems nothing here can shake some posters faith in this stock no matter how many potential warning signals may be being given off.

The pull back has gone to a support level so fingers crossed it holds and moves back up from here.

"We both agree that if/when BP put a price on our assets it's likely to be rather large"

I tried to make the point that the question is not trying to explain and discuss what we can't see but rather what we can, ie the low SP.

This is getting into the somewhat over-hypothetical, however, say its not that large (£1b), what then? will whatever BP offer (should they do so), close the argument? I am betting it would not and we would be back on the merry go round of making up figures to justify higher valuations.

This is where the constant denigration of the SP becomes ever more ridiculous.

It really does not matter what drives the SP, be it sentiment, or value, but as we can see there is no consensus on the value or even how the value is calculated. By definition no one is going to rush to buy a stock that they think is fairly or over valued, everyone is looking for undervalued stocks.

As a result when the individual comes to sell the single and only consideration will be what the SP is. So its hardly meaningless. Understanding better what drives that is a better key (imo) then trying to guess what results may occur from trials several years down the track, in getting better returns from investments.

So I say again,

Sam, to conflate the "valuation" discussion with how science works is ridiculous.

Thats not how science works at all.

Theroies that are put forward try to explain observable effects.

The facts are this data is well known by all and has been for may months/years, and the SP is 47p. There is no evidence that BP is interested in this stock or that the market has mis-valued the stock.

That is the "evidence" and the discussion should be around why that is, not why it isn't.

Thats what makes the argument absurd.

it is simply an opinion based on the premise that the trial currently, and future trials, will be 100% successful in humans.

The reason why trials are moved from animals to humans is because the results in animals are not predictable enough.

Well, clearly investment houses are taking no notice of AI when it comes to AVCT, or perhaps they have prhased thir question differently.

The basic fact is that the market incl. BP, have over 4 years with new data continually being released allowed the SP to fall and fall. None took part in the last 50p cash raise. It all suggests that they are not currently interested in AVCT's tech at this time.

and no amount of research can change those inaleinable facts

So it does not so much beg the question as to why, but screams it. Nothing to date says BP are talking to AVCT about any sort of deal. (they might be, who knows), but there is nothing to point to that they are, at all.

So yes I am cautious and fwiw imo everyone else should be too.

As alwayd expect the best while preparing for the worst, then you are covered.