Member Info for wyndrum

"It’s AIM that’s thick as mince here, not pharma. 🤣"

I cannot believe, that you as an investor, constantly saying the aim market is a useless forum for valuing stocks, then goes out and buys stocks on aim!

When you buy them aim is wrong, but if they go up then aim will be great. Its just illogical nonsense.

But going back to your latest, non-factual statement: The market is made up of individuals and companies that are pharma or closely related to pharma. To stupidly try and separate a market from other companies and individuals that are in it is just absurd.

If Pharm know all about AVCT (which they do and have done for years), then there is a reason why the SP is still 75p. So far the trials cllearly show promise but are not close enough for them to fund.

Its so staring you in the face bloody obvious that it beggars belief your only tune is no one apart from you, knows anything about how advanced AVCT is in their trial(s).

And worst of all your track record based on your belief in your searing analysis in other companies is at best, as generous as i can be, not very good, so quite why you do think you know it all is a wonder to behold.

You may think i am stupid but you are running me close.

If AVCT want to capitalise on the continued advancement in results then they should display the science within the context of commecialisation.

I hope that given it is a science based presentation and the traditional SP reaction to these events, that a different approachis taken.

It does not seem to be beyond the wit of man to marry the two together.

Shareholders should be considered when these presentations are being crafted.

XB, fwiw and I know its a bit late now but if you have access to a chart and can overlay the RSI (Relative strength indicator) then that shows whether a stock is over bought or over sold.

TYhe paremeters are if it is 30 or less its over sold therefore(likely to rise and if it is 70 or more it is over bought and likely to fall.

My experience for greater consistency is when the parameters hit 20 or 80.

In ITMs case, it closed (RSI) last week at 75.77 so was already technically over bought and therefore a bit toppy, but when it opened at 166p that would have (had it stuck ) put in around the 80 mark on the RSI, so a fall from there was very likely.

There will always be exceptions but generally and most often it is a good aid to time entry and exit.

ATB

"BV..not so...stop reading UK press and fake news..."

Thats the problem, how do you know your news isn't fake?

It looks to me we are heading to a modern dark ages.

No one trusts anything, fake websites look so real no one downloads anything, AI reduces new thinking (well, all thinking really), learning will be a thing of the past. All states have to become more dictatorial and repressive to attempt the impossible, no one trusts anyone and we all become ever more insular, the political system (again as we have known it), breaks down and bit by bit civilisation as we understand it also breaks down and collapses. (We are well on the way so its hardly a leap to play the tape to the end)

Happy May Bank Holiday.

"You want to live under Chinese rule that's fine...I don't."

Hmm... where does freedom of speech sit then? What about the cancel culture?

What about cenesorship of alternative views?

I think you will find this board alone runs on dictatorial edict from a select view who believe they are right and everyone else should be quiet or leave, but not before making up lies and insulting them so they can pretend that they have discredited the opposition.

China? Its already here and thriving and you know what? Bella has filtered me so won't even see this.

Its pretty insidious isn't it?

Sorry GF I misread your post, I thought it was in context of my brief history of deliberate over reactions by politicians and media over the the last 60 years.

Digi, I didn't say people would not be impacted, but this is being very exaggerated in its outcome.

In Covid there were precious few gaps on the shelf and they were quickly resolved. Yes we had to pay for them but that was far more difficult for goods to be shipped than now.

I don't know why you think money will be the problem to less developed nations, they will simply put their prices up like everybody else.

Maybe this one will be different but I very much doubt it.

And it may shine a light on the likes of ITM (Hurrah!), but in the grand scheme of things its yet another shake down on the populous.

GF, I never said the Ukraine war would be over in 3 months?

It was obviously strung out by the west to slowly degrade Russia's military capacity.

This has been carefully regulated by the west to just keep the poor ukrainian people in the game.

things may well cost more for a bit (fuel already), but its not this massive recession/inflation disaster.

i remember when we were all going to get mad cow disease, i remember when every single egg in the uk apparently contained salmonella, (though none did), i remember when we would all either die from or know some one with aids by the mid 90's, i remember even the world ending by the year 2000 in ww3. i remember an ice age coming in the 70's causing global famine, i remember covid would kill us all, i remember the ozone layer being destroyed with thousands of years for it to repair itself. i remember the financial crash where the worlds finance would collapse, i remember that all planes would fall out of the sky at midnight 1/01/2000 because computers would stop working. (thats just off the top of my head .)

there is a never ending stream of apocalyptic scenarios trotted out ever more frequently to scare us ****less.

its been exacerbated by the nonsensical 24 hour news cycle that has to over exaggerate every bit of news however detached the huge and vast majority are from it and its supposed effect, so as to keep us tuned in.

"...the world is heading for a massive food, fuel and financial crisis"

I'm pretty sure its not.

This is being massively hyped.

If 20% goes through that waterway then 80% doesn't.

Plus alternatives will be already being put in place. (Plus it will be sorted out fairly soon.)

Yes some upheaval, yes some inflation but in the great scheme of things this is a (very) typical panic/scare media story.

The world is absolutely awash with oil and gas.

But none of this affects ITM one way or the other, apart from the very short term

Dolly, it is an expression to denigate here, any view that does not extoll AVCT.

I do not believe any post commits to any "fear" that is simply nonsensical when talking about the pros and cons of a stock.

However Uncertainty? well, its a high risk bio tech stock that everybody here acknowledges so by definition the high risk translates to uncertainty. As for doubt, again that is a necessary feature of any investor to continually question the "facts" as they are given and known and to satisfy there veracity to their own satisfaction.

So this somewhat infantile "insult" thrown around is completely misplaced here and only as ever, illustrates their lack of intelligence.

What they can't argue is that when the trial started 5 years or so ago the SP was higher than it is now. So therefore after 5 years of cohorts, positive data, phase 1a and b, interviews science days, RNS's either the SP was hopelessly over valued then, or has failed to impress as the market expected after listening to the AVCT board at the time. (or a mixture of both)

By me commenting on this most obvious, staring ion your face outcome I am being deliberately nasty and "spreading" FUD, even though if some had acted on my thoughts would be richer today than just leaving it in the stock.

So I am criticised effectively for half not bad analysis over many years to be despised and reviled as having multiple alliases, an agenda and also i am sad, have no life and live in a basement. (oh and I am bitter, even though I have made good profits out of this stock.) They are not very bright.

Its a funny old world.

Hi moonshot, I have found that on loss making companies you have to be very careful when to buy and exit.

Ultimately I have found what works for me is to have aplan.

Know what price I want to pay and when I do buy ,I already I have two sell prices in mind: one if it goes up and one If I am wrong and it falls.

That way I know how much I will profit or lose. Which then gives me a risk reward. So I buy at 1.7 and I will sell if I am wrong at 1.2 (bloody Spread!) So I am risk .5p per share loss.

Where will I sell If I am right: trickier on a loss maker that comes good but I expect them to go into profit late this year and forecast about £8m for the following year. A PE of 10 being very broad brush gives a market cap of about 80-100m so about 6 times from where we are now implyiing a SP of about 10p. So I am risking .5p to make 10p. That is a very attractive risk reward.

I always factor in time as that is a crucial part of the R/R. I will give this up to 15-18 months.

So thats my plan It may get tweaked along the way if good news is better than forecast and the stop price would be moved up to protect profit.

I honestly don't understand how anyone randomly buys a stock they like with no thought of the buy in price or the other prices I have noted because when sudden things happen (and thats common place in high risk stocks) they have no idea what to do and are then their actions are dictated by fear and or greed and then... well, then good luck! with that.

All the best

Its tricky thats for sure.

I put my isa allowance into Nat west, down 6% in a week.... hmmm...and this week RR, which was down 3% but turned it around today. These are the safe stocks portfolio but its a bit more volatile than I expected still, as long as I am up 10% in divs and capital over the year I won't mind.

I have high hopes for XSG, looks to be a good year coming.

Are you going to the AVCT "day"?

Sorry D.... :0((

Oh and thanks Blue. It has taken me a while but I am getting there...

Thanks Blue, I looked up the SP here on LSE but it only goes back 5 years but it says it was 256p.

So all my "negativity" and all my tripe and look how dumb I was! the sp is now 73p, so if you had bought then you would have had a 70% capital loss plus having that money tied up for 5 years which just in a savings account at about 4-5% annual return would be the equiv of about 311p per share.

Anyway thanks again for helping me make my point and showing up the posters who keep saying how smart they are.

"as you will just automatically dismiss others without thought." Thats the point Chris, I think very carefully about what people post.

I am not looking for certainty. I am invested in this stock understanding the risk to my capital and believe there is greater chance of success than failure.

Its just the other posters dismissing the chance of set backs, talking of deals as though they are done without the fist clue of what is going on, bandying about valuations without having any knowledge at all in the economics of a structured deal.

Talking about ND listings and always side stepping the potential cost to current shareholders assuming that it will all be alright in the long run not based on "value" but simply because the ND values the same company differently and the only reason they want to be on ND is because they think it will make them richer. If it was that easy why aren't AVCT already on it?

The lack of thoughtful discussion on the downsides is more important than this never ending rose tinted view of every interview/data release and dream land valuation that brooks no argument or other view.

I understand that somewhat stary-eyed view to a degree but given many here surely, must have got some investments badly wrong that shows them through experience its not that easy or as straight forward as just listening to what a CEO says and knowing that not all the data is released and it is always partial makes them at least a bit wary?

Obviously not.

Blimey I do get that guys, but the reason sgc was chosen was because of and only because there is no treatment at present.

Its only phase 1 its still years away from being allowed to being administered. It could thoretically still "fail" in larger cohorts with more data to drill down on. in phase 2 and it may well need phase 3.

This is expensive stuff so if the licensee has to stump up tens of millions and still has a risk attached that gets translated to the license dea value to AVCT.

And remember stop looking at the total market spend and focus on the profit.

Its like assuming every pound that goes into the till is a pound profit without factoring staff, cost of product and all the other overheads every business has.

Thats why I think it impossible to have even a remotely sensible conversation about valuation. We simply have no idea about almost all of it.

Ok, Im not sure about the maths but, BP are not doing it at cost so the value to AVCT is that much harder to gauge, esp as it is only in phase 1so I dunno, £500m for a 10 year license given it might take another couple of years before they can charge for it?

Mkt Cap is already £330m Or about $400m so its tricky to value these things when we have so little info.

Thats why I thought it was the reason they went after Breast cancer. Unfortunately, very prevelant and therefore much more valuable but AVCT now won't pursue it.

Anyway, its all about this trial now

I bought yesterday D at 1.76p (the spread is pretty painful!)

I am emotionally a bit disappointed that it has effectively not moved over the last 2 trading sessions as it suggests (given the stop start buying selling profile this stock has), that that is it until new news.

On the other hand it is (if the board is to be believed), entering a reasonably news rich period over the next 3 months so its not long to wait and also there could/should be days when buys come in ahead of news so as to position themselves for it when it does turn up.

I was hoping more for 1.9p level while we wait. But its ok. overall I am up and pretty close to BE on yesterdays tranche.

(I fell into ITM this week which has proved fortuitous. Don't know if its crossed your radar? So although I have missed the "big" rises nevertheless there looks plenty more to come? I bought in 2 stages at 130 and 140, having waited for the RSI to unwind, so already a decent paper profit)

Thanks D, so about 5 people per million in the western world give or take?

(given the advert headline is one in two will get cancer I just wanted to try to get an idea of what CC meant by "significant" as we have been here before with accepted understandings of words which have different definitions in the health world.")

I am not saying there isn't a market for this but at the end of all of this (which I genuinely believe some here forget), is that this is a business. A return and in fact a big return is needed for pharmas to take on new drugs/platforms.

I was trying to gauge how much it is worth and I wondered if there was no standard treatment in part because it was not cost effective to do and if that was the case it would affect the valuation of any license deal.