Member Info for wyndrum

Ade, 987p ish, is a reasonably strong resistance level.

The 3 options are it tries and fails falls back or breaks through onto 1000p, or hovers around this level for a while before deciding what to do.

(I think there is an update out this week so the strong run up looks to be an expectation of good figures.)

The 2 options I think are most likely is (given the RSI is starting to approach over bought territory) is that it gets to 900p and falls back to take a breather before having another go at it or it breaks it easily (becomes overbought), and the RSI unwinds back to the now new strong support of 897p.

In my opinion either of those two scenarios says buy now with a 1% wiggle room below the battle ground of 897p where a fight looks inevitable.

Joe, the trial is about safety, so theoretically (because I have already stated I don' think this is happening, but what do I know), if for the sake of argument, the AVCT bit was making no difference then you would up the dose to see if that made the tech work as long as the patient was not being harmed. The 2 are (or could be) exclusive.

Isn't that the whole point of this part of the trial?

Pa "To suggest that this is some spin job to fool shareholders is both distasteful and ludicrous."

You really are a piece of work to imply that.

The discussion was matching the SP to the potential and why the seeming disconnect. I mentioned LFT because AS said it was the best test in the world that in fact, was not sold commercially (before omicron), and that he was dealing with premier sports clubs along with "inking deals". Fortunately I don't pay much attention to what CEO's say because AS is in my experience typical. Its the game they play.

Just for you ripley , what we have is a trial that is based on safety protocols and the continuation means we are not hurting the patients. It could be, that its making no difference to the patient and they keep upping the dosage in the hope it will "work". (Based on what AS has said and that it going to plan, or as expected, I personally don't think that.)

But its these optimistic assumptions that allow people to get carried away.

Speranza....Where in any of these 2 posts today or indeed any post I have EVER made have I asked for anyones's trust?

Let me help you... NEVER, so your summary is wrong, which indicates either you can't read, or understand english or are are just a silly, petty, small minded individual.

It seems impossible to debate interesting ideas unless of course the answer "has" to be AVCT will rule the world.

(I am truly amazed, given the recent history that many here experienced with the LFT, that that is simply discarded as though it never happened. As though AS was completely transparent and up front all the way through the whole exercise.

The desire for undeserved wealth (or lets call it greed as thats what it is), is a wonderous thing to behold as to its power to overwhelm any other emotion or rational thought.

RAh, (as you got so far 25 recs.)

Will there be a 5th DE? And if there is, will there be a 6th?

If no "extra" DE's what are the results? how well has it performed? When will these results be revealed? Have biopsy's been taken will they be included in the results?

Don't be so obviously crass: We all know how long the trial has been going on for; we all know how "excited" AS and the others are.

But AS has, whether we like it or not, justified or not, run investors up the hill before only to disappoint.

I am happy to take the gamble as just about all others here are too. but knock the "certainty" bit as though you know stuff that you don't.

54's answers and my ltd contribution, are trying to think through what others who aren't as emotionally invested in the actual company might be thinking. We are trying to walk in their shoes a bit to see what might be their reasons for holding back on investing in the company.

I have been criticised for my poor judgment on backing ADV and SYN and HE1 as they all ultimately failed: But the irony is those BB's were exactly, identically, like here inasmuch as the optimism precluded any chance of failure, or more accurately to say, the chance of failure was acknowledged with lip service. "Yes, others have failed but not this one, it's because there is so much evidence that its all there and going to work and the shares will go up 20 fold.!"

Well they didn't.

AIM is littered with companies on the brink that did not deliver. So don't count chickens because clearly the market generally isn't.

(And if you want to throw some ****s into me personally for this post then one, I have learned from my mistakes which must say something, and two, I hope you have never recc'd a post when i have been ridiculed for my past stock pick failures because it was in part, based on listening to so called experts who knew more about the company than I did.

that is the question Wiggly and 54's reasons sound logical.
There are plenty of examples of disrupters being worth billions and high PER's before any profits were ever made.

LFT example : what product has AVCT EVER produced that was a commercial success?
AIM V NASDAQ speaks for itself but is the least impact imo given the SP at 130p currently.
UK V US. we have a terrible tradition of backing new tech here in this country so there is likely an element in that but we do have US exposure and have had for a little while so maybe thats not to be over egged.
Confirming RNS: That ties in a bit to the UK/US point but also point 1: too.

Right now, AVCT don't have anything. still in the very beginings of a trial journey which as Tim points out there are 100's of cancer trials taking place alongside this one.

So it seems very promising but even the big-eds on this BB can't work out if its about to finish or if there will be a 5th DE (Its a reminder of how little we actually know rather than always congratulating yourselves on our knowledge of the company which again was further proved by the furore over what turned out to be a much more low-key talk from Fiona than was billed at the begining of the week.)

So its too early. There have been (many) false dawns before with AVCT in particular and promising tech generally that does not ultimately deliver is the norm, not the exception.

I have changed my view and opinion that the market does want proof to revalue the company and therefor the SP. The previous hiatus had been the financial footing which to me has been dealt with in a very clever and novel way.

But if it comes down to 54's point 1 and 4 then we should have a much clearer picture by Xmas. (dyor etc etc)

I agree a 5th cohort would likely cause a negative SP reaction.

But the AVCT RNS states: "This trial of AVA6000 is a dose-escalation Phase I study in patients with locally advanced or metastatic selected solid tumours, known to be FAP-positive, in which cohorts of patients receive ascending doses of AVA6000 to determine the maximum tolerated dose and establish a recommended Phase II dose. The second part of the study is an expansion phase where patients receive AVA6000 to further evaluate the safety, tolerability and clinical activity at this recommended Phase II dose across selected tumour types. "

So they could start phase II while still examining and safety and tolerability levels.

I don't see any reason at this stage based on what has already been reported at each DE news release, that this part of the trial will need to be extended any further. (Dyor etc etc)

Yes, that is always a problem. But there is nothing wrong with sitting on your hands.

I only take stuff out if I think i am likely to see a biigger gain elsewhere is a shorter timescale.

So today with the latest fall in HE1 I have taken the last bit out as it had broken a support and put into AVCt as it is on a support/resistance line (127p)and with the recent upward momentum looks more likely to be a breather on further gains than presaging further falls. (but who knows..._

As for WOSG, it looks to be going up to anywhere from 875p -900p so i would not sell until it got there. (Although i think over the next 2-3 years this could be a very good return with little risk so i am not anxious to overly trade this one, rather let the market do its work on this one over time.

Hi D, as long as you don't mind I'm happy to pitch in.

Your example "...that if I were 'down' on a share yet the RSI were 85 I would find it hard to sell even though I know the likelihood is that it would fall back shortly......"

That scenario would mean I think, that you had bought initially at a higher price, then it fell quite a bit and you did not close out sooner, hoping it would rise, and maybe it did a bit, but it fell further so that it then ends up with an rsi at 85 but still below your buy in price?

Which is why you have a stop. The stop price that makes you sell should be "proof" that your decision was wrong. Ie you bought in the expectation it would rise, but it fell. Thats where support lines are important.

The whole concept between a support price and a resistance price is that the SP oscillates between these two prices:

Lets say Support 35p resistance 50p: If you buy at 45p and it falls to 41p, you have lost 10% which is a lot. But so what? it has been in this range before and gone back up. Your stop would be 34p because if it went below a level where previously it went to and recovered means that now the buyers are not there at 35p so the SP will likely fall further until new buyers are tempted in and a new support is found.

So you would be buying at 45p with a stop of 34p (11p) for a rise to 50p (5p) a risk reward of 1-2!!!! which is not worth the bet.

You would buy in when it bounced off 35p for the 2nd or 3rd time, say at 38p, risking 4p loss for a 12p gain to 50p which is a 3-1 risk reward which is the minimum you should be looking for. If you can't find it on a stock you "like" then simply look for another.

Remember, you are not forecasting what will happen just finding bets that put the odds in your favour with a profit sufficient to cover the occasional losses hence you need at least a 3-1 risk reward ratio.

Just buying a stock at a random price and if it moves a few % the wrong way, sell it, will I am pretty sure lead to losses over the (probably not so) long term

Buying loss making, small companies tends to make the moves and spread larger meaning losses can be greater.

If you want to play around look at big stocks like BP Shell, AAl ASZ Glen etc and see what the moves are made over the days/weeks/months to see if you can identify the supp & res lines. (do the trade on paper. you don't have to actually place hard earned on it and just practise by paper trading. (You may be surprised I think, how easy it is to do when it is an academic exercise taking all the emotion out of it compared to when you have real skin in the game and that in itself is instructive.

Fair enough pb, but there might be an argument that it is the scientists that cause the problem's that then in time, need rectifying, but thats how we progress, I guess. Anyway. Onwards and sideways.....

Hi D: thanks for the extra detail.

"I think I might target prices as a percentage up or down (and settle for a few percent profit but trade more often) "

That sounds random to me? So what % will you allow the SP to fall before you sell? What % appreciation will you also allow before you bank the profit?

When you buy the stock initially, what makes you think its going to go up? (as opposed to down?) What is your risk reward ratio going to be?

"I think that trading is easier if you're 'up' as crystallising a big loss, like with eve, is so painful."

Nope. One, you never let a loss get so big its painful to close and you never have bet so much that if the trade goes bad against you and two your reasoning is based on an emotional response. (you have to channel your Vulcan side, ha ha).

You don't have to use support and resistance lines to decide when to buy or sell but there is a reason why these peaks and troughs form. (once a pattern forms it stops being "random".)

AVCT is an example of a predictable stock that has been thus far easy to trade. What has made it harder for many is the greed factor of "what if". However that is a reasonable scenario, in which case out some funds into it as a longer term bet to see how it plays out and then trade it (if you want) with a separate amount and mentally divorce your self from the two holdings.

Most people lose at trading (I was one of them) because the "plan" is not that robust and cannot divorce their emotions from what they are doing. (Fear & Greed are tremendously powerful drivers of human action. I would not under estimate them.)

And by the time the individual starts to figure it out they have lost their capital and become another statistic as to how "trading" does not work

What... you don't want scientists? We would not have had the ind. rev. without them....In which case you would not have the materially comfortable life you have enjoyed up to now? (Just read a bit harsh...?)

pb940: "In my opinion our generations problems will be nothing in comparison to what will be left for the the next generation to contend with. I think we'll have to disagree on our viewpoints or we could clog the board up more than we have."

Just a quick one: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62636746

Scientists are well on the way to having global zero emissions by 2050 (starting in 2035) by harvetsing solar energy in space and beaming it down in microwaves and converting it to Electricity.

Morning D: " My sell was timed pretty well as the share did then fall back but I then bought back much too early "

Try if you can to break that mindset:

What actually happened is that you bought at 105p and sold at 140p. That trade was clearly very successful.

The trade where you have bought back in at around 128p ish? is now a new trade and you will have (or should have) a target as to when to sell it. Also you should have a stop that if it falls , when you should crystalise the loss.

So no, right now you not have not bought in too early. Only time will tell how successful or not this new trade will be.

You can't know the future and as I always say you have to pull the trigger. You could have waited to see if it fell further, but what if jumped back up?

So its all about target prices. What are the odds of it falling to a certain price you have identified? You have to identify these "target prices" otherwise you don't have a system, and you are just randomly buying and selling.

Cheers

one last word might be... don't rush it...if you get a couple of wins under your belt carry on keeping it small. Once you "want" or " need" the outcome to go in your favour you will be amazed how quickly it can go wrong. (well, that was my experience, anyway!) ha ha

perhaps the SP is not about the company but buyers and sellers expectations of what will happen in the future.... now there's a thought....(I actually can't believe your baffled.)

I would leave Argo alone. I don't like the premise as I think Crypto's are not viable long term, let alone its own very parlous state. (Its EVE all over again, Not worth the risk in my book)

Same goes for CINE. The cinema is dead as a concept so I would bet its just a matter of time.

The difference between trading and LTB&H is just the timescale, however the "idea" of trading is that you try and keep making 3-10% profits more frequently.

The mindset potentially allows a more nimble approach to specific situations. My experience has been that the shorter I hold a share the less attached I get to the company. (which is a good thing I think.) It allows me to focus on the here and now and what might happen to the SP over the short term rather than look at the company itself over the long term. (A concept some apparently find hard to understand.)

The good thing is there are so many companies out there that there is no need to chase the Cine's and Argo's of this world that might return (against the odds) great returns. Its easier than people think to get a few % here and there (not ever day but 5-10% a month would annualise out at a great return.)

Practise makes perfect D and also because its quite a mechanical process, it is far far easier when starting this new method, to be playing with money that is small enough for you not to care or worry about the outcome (win or lose).

It was a no brainer to sell around the 140p mark because there were only a few outcomes. The SP actually closed that high which would have, at a close RSI be above 80 which would have pretty much said a fall would happen to day or it carried on rising iand closed say 150p even more over bought leading to at worse a retrace to 140p ish so even if you bought back in the "loss " would have been very small.

Or it did what it actually did and fell from a strong resistance level intra day, in any of the 3 scenarios you were likely to either make money or just have a 1% and trading cost downside. So the risk reward was good. I am very glad it worked for you. But as I say, my advice (fwiw), would be, keep the bets very small so you feel you can emotionally detach yourself from the outcome, because there will be times you lose. :0))

Touk,

There are 2 options I think:

1: its a bit of a non-event as its no new info and talks about pre trial stuff. (given how long the trial has actually been running it seems a bit passe?)

2: It was a bit of a comms muck up and there was/is going to be new info delivered prior to Sat and the meeting fleshes out tis "new news".

Given how close AVCT probably is to the end of 1a it makes me think that option 2 is more likely otherwise what can Fiona talk about that is not already well known and documented? If it is option 1, then maybe she can then highlight how excited AVCT is being so close to the end of the actual trial but as I say the deadline to the end is too close (for me), to make that much sense?

So my hunch is there will be an RNS prior to Saturday. But that's all it is.

I think Hurst is another Sujood.......