Member Info for wyndrum

I agree Jan and Mkt Cap is always one of the first things I look at when trying gauge potential returns and that is a big tick in the box here.

Both companies could be classes as disruptors IF they deliver and both work in huge global markets.

Morning Van,

I hope you are right with your view of CPX and it culd well be correct as bad news is invariable just ignored so as I say your view that they are waiting for the good news first could certainly be accurate. Time as ever will tell.

The problem with me and most of the current posters over at AVCt goes back years and I was one of the first to suggest that way back in covid times the LFT was not going to be either in time and then a bit later, perhaps there were more fundamental problems with it.

Given the cult-like devotion many of them have to AVCT (but really its just a devotion to greed), could not accept that view/opinion and resorted to the foulest abuse.

Unfortunately for them events proved me right and then have never forgiven me.

having said all that, there are some pretty nasty characters there that you will find I think on all social media platforms but for whatever reason there seems to have been a disproportionate collection of them on the AVCT BB.

I struggle to come to terms that just because you might see things differently, you have to be so socially awful to one another, but its the time it seems we live in.

Anyway, just as with CPX I think it will be clear some time this year if they really have something. (I hope they, both companies) do! :0))

Its all a bit cloak and dagger...

Well, I suppose it isn't , its just us that thinks its all going on through NDA's and the like. Maybe it isn't, maybe it s just the hum drum of a business plying its wares.?

Its year next month since THAT design win. 12 months and not a peep since. Difficult to discern it actually came to anything after all.

We have to wait a while yet for the next update but hopefully those future sales will have translated into cash and not further Jam tomorrow.

Timing is everything but it feels like a wasted year to me buying when i did.

What complicates matters (I think maybe uniquely?) are the linkedin posts and then deletions? (what is that all about), the continuous very bullish sentiments but with no official back up via an RNS.

No response to legitimate enquiries to the company considering the strange behaviour of LI (and that is just very very poor for which there is no excuse, given they are a PLC), no update on previous orders (SA generators for instance).

I don't think it needs a "Rabbit out of the hat" , but a more realistic and comprehensive update is due to put into context the various strands that have been previously mentioned.

But there is about as much chance of that, based on my limited involvement with this company , as flying to the moon.

Bah Humbug

Certainly AVCt looks very promising now and again like CPX, it seems to me almost (almost) inconceivable that the CEO's can row back on their previous bullish statements without there being real fuel to the fire. (AVCT looks ripe for a breakout next week)

(I used the HE1 funds to top all 3 stocks and am happy with the balance in these 3 currently (I guess thats a cue for HE1 to rocket on Monday!)

Going back to XSG, when a company is on what I believe an upward trend i tend to add at pullbacks with new money from somewhere, rather than sell and buy back in lower. Its only when it starts to stagnate but is volatile that I would trade it. (So i would wait for a range and trade within the range).

XSG is of the 3 least suitable due to the spread, So as I say i might add or sell looking at a longer timeframe but unlikely to try to trade it short term.

Exciting times ahead. Lets hope good exciting and not bad exciting!

Hi D, I think I will ride it out unless there is bad news. For instance I have come out of HE1 for the time being as it "feels" there is something wrong. They had a tanker to load helium in January and it fills in a couple of days. 3 months later and still no money coming in? so it smells off to me.

So with this one deals are meant to be imminent well, again its been 4 months so it is time to deliver. This week should be instructive. But as long as there are no material delays then I think the SP should appreciate and all being well, it really should tip into being a profitable company.

That is (imo) a HUGE development for any loss making company and would immediately get a big rerate. it de-risks further need for raises and it starts to allow the process of a more typical company valuation. As the market dislikes uncertainty it allows more funds to go into what then becomes a legitimate growth stock.

I might trade it maybe, if the RSI goes way into over bought levels but it would be more of a topslice rather than a complete sell and then rebuy lower down as if there was a dramatic rise it does throw indicators a bit out of sync and they become a lot more unreliable.

But first things first. All these inking deals need to be confirmed and cash coming in. If it fails to do any of that then I might reduce my holding down potentially a complete sell. (I hope not as I bought more last week!)

The price action is starting to warm up in positive anticipation but it does not feel like they "know" something. (At least not yet, anyway!)

ATB

They have moved the ask up to 1.4 now which suggests they need stock.

Fingers crossed at last something might actually happen :0))

Blimey Ice, how rich are you exactly!

Been a bit bored today and saw your investment in VTY at least a £100k in it and it is quite a bit down plus the others that have been hard work. your trading pot seems inexhaustible. Goodness knows how much you have in AVCT! Hats off to you

Biggi, "Wyn you no doubt sold at or just below 80 - no criticism of that. But again on the drop yesterday you ramp up the negativity."

Why post something you have absolutely no knowledge of? Why? No doubt? how can you be so sure?

Its wrong and in your logic I must be bullish when I am buying but when am I ever accused of ramping?

Can't you see your own bias leads you to false conclusions?

If I could time the market that well I really would be posting this from my penthouse in New York!

Also I would counter that I am negative.

My posts simply try to balance the positive bias here by asking how people come to their positive conclusions when they do not have all the data and when I see quite large holes in their logic, as in this case.

I hold currently with the largest position I have had for some time having bought at the (as it turned out )low of 50p a few months ago because the support held. It was not much of a gamble because I would have sold as soon as the support went. As that support held and the SP increased so my holding increased. I have expressed my view that it is in the mid 80's where the next target would be so why you assume I sold at 80 is not clear to me, and very recently I think 125p is a new, relatively near term target.

None of this will convince anybody of anything and thats the point.

You cannot find it in yourselves to believe what I post so you have to construct, frankly fantastical scenarios to justify your false assumptions.

I don't care about AVCT in an emotional sense. I hope very much for cancer patients everywhere that they succeed just as I do on any other company trying to make progress in this field, but as an investment I do my best to stay detached and constantly examine the downside because if I don't I might get blindsided by optimism and positive bias and potentially lose a lot of money.

Thats why I read and stay here. I try to when reading the posts, separate the info from some of the more baseless conclusions.

I listen to same interviews as you all do maybe the difference is where some get excited about certain phrases that CC might make, I ignore those as her simply doing her job, banging the drum. It may or may not happen.

Today, and yesterday the SP has fallen. What does that mean? some owners of stock felt that it was financially better for them to sell rather than hold.

Not everyone sees it the same. that does not make every single one of them wrong and just a few posters here correct. The track record of the bullish posters here over the years has been awful. None of them foresaw price falls. They have consistently been 100% incorrect. 100%.

Yet somehow they should be listened too as they have done all the research and still, come to the wrong conclusion.

Doesn't it make you stop and think that maybe ta different pov might be useful?

Well, I used shorthand so where am I materially incorrect?

Somebody tell alderbaron that if he wants to comment on my posts he should read them. He makes himself look foolish.

It seems to me there is a slight disconnect here. And it might be me.

I thought the platform is designed to wrap the drug when administered keeping it out of the body until it is triggered by the tumour and then it is released making it "safe" by reducing toxicity and allowing increased doses to attack the tumour. And thats it. so if it does that then the platform "works"

The (reasonable) assumption is that having more of the drug in greater quantity directly in the tumour then it MUST therefore be more effective.

But the second bit (the assumption) is not about the platform. If for some reason the tumour was not affected in the way expected then the platform could and indeed does work BUT the effectiveness might disappoint.

It has seemed to me that CC repeatedly says there is evidence that the platform works and we then jump to the assumption that the effect is positive too.

My view is that has been more patchy and less predictable. I am sure the data released through the whole of AVA6k has been hugely helpful in understanding this and altering it to make this platform more consistently effective. But what do i know? no more or less than most here.

Morning Chris. I never said it was a coin toss. As you know I was referring to to the lack of need to indepth analysis and that this stock would win or lose on the success of this trial. It was in particular reference to all the AI questions and reading of runes, and other company valuations and all the rest of it. None of that gets any of us any further forward.

If it works as advertised we make a ton of money if it doesn't we don't.

What are the odds of success?

How do i know? how do you know?

Do we have all the data? do we have the expertise to interpret that info?

We are led by others to form an opinion.

I still think AVA6k stuttered but that has been overtaken by this new trial and we eagerly await the initial results So yes i think its binary and always was but I never said it was 50/50 (Because of the history of small bio techs I thought the odds were less than 50/50 initially but it is all perception, and opinion Now, listening to CC its done).

I may be wrong, but then so may you. I just have never understood why different views have led to such vitriol on something we have zero control and influence on. I honestly think this whole social media age is very odd and strange and not remotely a step forward for human civilisation. Quite the reverse.

Who said it was a coin toss Chris?

However that improvement has to be proved in a number of patients to build up a stastistical relavance.

I think it looks very promising on the mice/lab results and CC's bullish comments but we have to wait for the data. and thats the ball game. nothing else matters.

What it is about now, now that safety and proof of concept appear to have been achieved is demonstrating that once the drug of choice has more time and potency within the tumour that the results on the tumour are consistently better than previously.

Normally you would expect a lot of patients to be used to prove that stat.

Yes Flip, really.

This is pretty much a binary play and always has been.

As generality, whats different now that wasn't once the mice tests were done 6 years ago? (apart from a much reduced SP.)

Every hurdle has to be overcome before success is achieved. Completing everything they have done thus far won't count for much if the results in this trial are diasappointing.

So AVCT are staying the course but it has to be completed.

I don't know about you but I figured that out some years ago.

I think Ice you miss the point.

AVCT will be rerated on the back of new (good) news. If it goes up by 500% it won't be that you were right all along, it will be on the back of new data that confirms a new valuation onto AVCT.

I don't think AVCT will make it to ND if it means the valuation would increase substantively as it would make more sense to buy it out now rather than wait for an even higher price to pay for the same company on a different market,

Further, I think the reason that talks are taking place but with no deal yet done is exactly because the data is not there to justify a deal yet.

There has never been the need to do any in depth research on this company because it has always boiled down to this obvious fact.

If it works, it is worth a fortune, if it doesn't it isn't. There is no research that can influence the outcome.

All most here have done is place their bet. (there has also been the opportunity to trade it along the way.)

Chris I agree with some of your points. I am not sure the price disconnect is due to the bear Aim market. For instance how much is that worth 10%? 20%? (ie not material).

The thing is if this changes cancer care as is promised then when there is proof of that this will be a bull share in a bear market. or the state of AIM will have no bearing on the SP.

The other point you made was how important RH joing AVCT was. I certainly agree with that. I am guessing when he joined the market guessed or knew that finance was in place to counteract the potential death loop AVCT had got itself into with the Heights Loan.

I mention this as a reminder that some here crow about talk about a placing at 10p and how stupid that was to explore that possibility, yet the SP revival has clearly hinged around RH joining. This came as a (welcome) surprise to everyone here.

But what if had not joined? what then for the SP at that time?

I guess its a rebuff to those that so easily and callously dismiss any negative scenario then and for the future in hindsight when looking at various outcomes.

Certainly the size of AVCT (not MC) must be a concern to the market. 24 people to run 2 trials trying to completely transform cancer care. I think the market knows this cannot go on for long and the various outcomes that might take place all lead to different valuations. All positice scenarios hinge on positive data.

Clearly the market is waiting for that first before deciding quite where to rerate AVCT.

I see nothing odd or disconnected in the SP given the level of uncertainty and the already high valuation already attached to the company.

You only have to look at shareholder stakes and tier 1 holders to realise that as many here do, patience is still the order of the day but that has to be married to a degree of uncertainty of the success or not of the trial(s)

"AIM will catch up eventually."

That has been your defence for many years to explain the disconnect between the available data and the SP so when will Aim catch up?

I presume it will catch up when there is data such that it will justify a higher price? That also implies all the data released in those years was not suffcient for the market to reset the price to your personal valuation.

I just think your argument is baseless. You think the SP should be higher than the market allows, therefore the market is wrong but when it does match your own price it will somehow no longer be dysfunctional but will be working properly. Is that right?

My reasoned view has been deleted.

Not a single LSE guideline approached, let alone breached, just a few here automatically reporting my post because of inconvenient points raised.

This is cancel culture writ large.

The arrogance of these posters deciding they know best for all the rest of you is illuminating and breath taking.

These fantasists are the same that love to call me a narcissist but can't bear anyone reasonably constructing an argument to challenge their position believing their view trumps all but too scared to defend it.

Their lack of intellectual reason embarrasses them when confronted with flaws in their "argument", so they resort to crude insults and personal denigration rather than defend what is shown to be indefensible, and when that fails, resort to simply deciding to remove the post as though it never existed.

The argument that I disrupt this BB is as fallacious as the rest of their reasoning.

I'm not so sure its an either or in the way you describe D.

I don't think she is a charlatan, neither do i think she should be taken at face value.

She must, like all CEO's in her position, (plc, small company, needs financing to exist etc etc) potentially paint a lop sided position of the company's position.

I refer back to AS, not as alike for like comparison, but simply to remember how he stated the data and results and language used to keep confidence high and investors engaged. Most if not all here, at some time in his tenure, were very pleased with him and believed exactly what he said and took him at face value. It was only as it unravelled later that opinions changed.

I too think CC has framed AVCT to date so positively that it seems that she surely can't be leading us all up the garden path, but she may be caught to a degree in positive bias too? I am not saying she is but she said a deal would be in the not to distant future.

II believe now that statement was premature. But the words were carefully chosen. How long is "not to distant" in the future 2 weeks 2 months 2 years?

There was no context for investors to calibrate such a ambiguous statement.

There was never a clear communication to the time for enrolment on AVA6k, assumptions here were made it was all going full steam ahead but eventually we find that patients were still being selected many months later to at least my surprise.

I don't mind much of this. Its complicated and challenging and expensive to run these trials. But I do mind giving a false impression.

So I think its much more nuanced and her first objective is to keep the trial(s) going and the show on the road

Scepticism for me is always the order of the day. If this comes off she's brilliant, if it doesn't then, not so much but it will be in hindsight I think, before that judgement can be made.

We inch ever closer to ultimately the defining results.

This is what I think the results show:

The platform works by reducing toxicity dramatically for the patient and does release the drug directly into the tumour. I believe the trial ava6k proves this. The new trial has also in the mice and lab, continued this development.

What still has to be proved is the consistent effect it has on the tumour(s) itself. I also believe there have been head scratching results in the trial (AVA6k)

How it is reacting in the present trial is currently unknown.

If you read everything CC is saying (forget the "excitement" and "expectations" and all that stuff ), the she is is not talking about the actual results on patients, only that it does what it was designed to do, ie keep the patient safe and delivers the drug to the tumour. That it was she bangs on about, that it was thee posters say.

Where the excitement comes is from the logical conclusion that more drug in the tumour MUST result in better outcomes for the patient by a quicker destruction of the tumour and allowing more doses and or higher levels to expedite a "cure".

However I believe it is vastly more complicated than that.

The way we see success and the reason we bought the stock was for SP appreciation, but not any old appreciation but a multi-multi bagger return based on what looks to be achievable based on this breakthrough.

So some here (me included) look to that SP which everything hinges on from all our POV's, as the most obvious indicator to see what is most likely happeneing behind the scenes that we are not permitted to see or get up to date info on.

The argument that the SP does not matter (based on the market does not understand what is on offer), seems extremely weak to me. There is not a single shred of evidence that this is the case and is just an illogical excuse to justify a view that this is effectively done and it is only the official release of data in the future to confirm what some posters here KNOW is already happening.

What I think is that there are enough people who watch and know this technology (all BP, all investment managers who specialise in this area and potential game changers in areas of tech, as well as all the PR that AVCT do behind the scenes both here and the US for 5 years), to suggest it is more likely than not that the "market" is very aware of what is being attempted but to date are not convinced it is the slam dunk so many here not only assume, but will brook no other point of view.

There I think the SP does matter as the single most indicator we have to get a feel of where AVCT really are.

The SP, imo, will move substantially higher only when new news is released that actually confirms some consistency of better outcomes.

If that happy day arrives many here may say "I told you so". Ok, great but they didn't know, they simple took a risk without knowing all the facts and in spite of that, not because of it, effectively