Member Info for wyndrum

Cheng on the LG RNS there was reference to an un disclosed up front payment, so there was money, just not shown to us "investors"

SJ, perhaps the August LG Chem RNS was reflecting that Sars inhibitor breakthrough. It was suitably vague but as a timeline makes sense from the June quote you provided and also, annoyingly vague, from avacta, in their recent update referring to other covid solutions?

I think you may have got your wish AP... if it moves much more there will be talk of an RNS tomorrow....

314-316 looking fairly easy right now

Thanks Hugo. Look at the US.....

ES: Where did I or have ever done, deny covid? My contention is that it is not as deadly as is reported due to the inaccurate tests available combined with the similar unreliability of recording cause of death.
You quoted the number of global deaths at 1.5m so far.
Do you think that is a lot, then globally? Apparently the worlds population is 7.8b therefore 7.8m represents 1%
1.5m deaths represents less than .25%, less than a quarter of 1 percent.
Given no one can be exactly sure if those figures are correct and I am not minimising the events themselves I am trying to get a sense of perspective as to why the world has effectively bankrupted itself for this particular virus and how long it will continue to do so. My guess is not as long as perhaps others here think.

ES: how are these deaths recorded, how do you or any of us know they died from covid? have they all had autopsies or tests? And thats not to be flippant because respiratory illness is a very common cause of death, but there are many respiratory dieses out there. How many unfortunately would likely have died in the next 3-6 months anyway? Apparently the "average" age of someone in the UK who has died from Covid is 82.
Do you trust the govt stats on covid both with cases and deaths?

Tyche, I don't know, maybe you are right, and testing will be needed for years, but that's not normally how it works. Normally you just get vaccinated. I don't think we should under estimate the worlds ability to vaccinate a lot of people very quickly if that's what they (the world's govt's) decide to do.

That's true vegas, but it presupposes this particular virus warrants the cost.
Whatever happened to Swine Flu? That caused a huge stir the first year in the media regarding the NHS can't cope, all the deaths, etc etc and then nothing the next year... not a word....Its included in the flu jab now but you won't here anything much about it or the flu generally, unless the NHS can't cope, although its a big killer but generally only of old people.
This is only about country's ability to "show" their health systems can "cope". Once that spotlight is removed all of a sudden it will be yesterdays news.

I am sure many have already figured this out but all the govt is doing and has ever done since the start of the covid crisis is to "save" the NHS and make sure, whatever it takes, whatever the cost, it is not "overwhelmed". (The indecent haste with which the Pfizer vaccine has been rolled out is further proof, if further proof were needed.)
Vaccinating the staff of the NHS only protects them, it does not protect the patients as the staff could and are likely still to be infectious. Once they feel the NHS is no longer under threat from covid you can forget testing (on any meaningful scale) by them. It will become ( I believe sooner than most think), just "another" virus that the population deals with. The cost of testing and vaccines for the general population will most likely be borne by the individual. It must not be forgotten that this virus is generally not particularly deadly. It will not warrant the vast govt. sums that have already been spent on it, to continue. As we all know the "cases" are largely counted by a remarkably unreliable test. So we don't actually know how bad/rampant it is. We don't even know how many deaths are caused by it as the govt stats are based on "with covid" on the death certificate, as opposed to "from" covid. How this affects AVCT I am not sure. If they can produce a home test cheaply then there is still great potential, but not in the tens of millions we thought even a few weeks ago. Like I said 2 weeks ago, 8 weeks is a long time in the world of tests and vaccines. The news story will move on and soon I think. (As more and more vaccines are released so it will no longer be an event to report in the way it has been. As far as the Media is concerned, once there is a "solution" they will move on.)
The good news is that the SP reflects all this and short of a failure to produce anything on all AVCT fronts, in the next 4 weeks, which is most unlikely, suggests that give or take another 5-10% we are probably at the bottom and long term (12 months plus), this is not a bad entry price.

08:08 122.50 150,000 120.00 124.00
£183,750 buy, someone confident.

Except the SP has fallen a few % since then.... L2 is the single most unreliable "indicator" available for predicting future SP movement. I'm am amazed anybody pays for it.

on a separate note H, with regards to buying and selling, I take the view that for every buy there has to be a sell and vice versa, so I think its difficult to draw a conclusion one way or the other. The other point to bear in mind is that it is buyers that force the price down and sellers that force the price up.

HI HH,
Ah yes, well I was more cautious then because it was not as clear as it is now as to the turn around however, the (only) benefit of BB's against simply finding every link elsewhere is the opportunity to debate the different sides of the coin. I fwiw I tend to exaggerate my view to hopefully spark a robust defence of the opposing view. I will be challenged on my perhaps overly pessimistic view, with maybe the same fervour of the optimistic scenario, which in turn I will question. What this board has been, and which so few are, is a good natured back and forth but at the same robust support of the differing opinions, and to be frank as I have said before, those arguments, I thought at the time, better than my cautious view, and therefore I changed my opinion.
I understand your problem HH when already fully invested. What I do in those circumstances is simply to look at my portfolio and try and decide what is the best value. EG, if I have stock that I think will go up 50% in 3 months (which is great!),but then think EVE will double in 3 months then I have no compunction about selling the 50% forecasted one for EVE. If all your stocks you hold, you believe will outperform EVE, then do nothing.
Long as we all remember that it is a crapshoot anyway, then who cares! Its the fun of the game! Good Luck

I am probably being influenced by "confirmational bias", but the RSI has formed a double bottom at 40 and SP chart "feels" (how emotional is that!), ready to move up and brake the recent high of 214p..... Anyway,f wiw, its a roundabout way of saying I have increased my holding. GLA

Tyche, I can't offer anything at a technical level to this BB.
What I "want" is to buy a stock at a lower price then when I sell it. I think that is what all buyers want. What moves the Share price is people buying and selling. If you can identify and be aware of the emotional drivers that do that, you can help skew the odds a bit more into your favour when making those decisions.
In the spirit of posting info that might help people I concentrate on highlighting where I can, how emotional we all are to be aware of how it can affect our decision making. I think its fair to say everyone understands the meaning of "sentiment" when referring to a stock but that really is just another way of saying emotional valuation. But that sounds a bit weak, a bit out of control, a bit not rational... And we don't like to be thought of that way. Its the same when people refer to themselves as "investors" and not "traders" with the inference that being an investor imbues some positive superior connotation rather than the grubby, in it for a quick buck, spiv, Trader, when in fact there is no difference in the 2 types of person at all, either in their goals or their methods.

That true Sperenza, but as this and all BB's are about opinions, I guess there is always the emotional satisfaction of being "proved" right while someone else is "proved" wrong. I think when and if AVCT release a positive share moving RNS, there will be plenty and I mean plenty, here who will crow about how they said this all along and poke fun at the posters on the other side of the argument

Speranza, I don't think just because people criticise (this) share it automatically makes them buyers but wanting a lower price. It must be quite the deluded person who thinks a BB post affects the SP. Or indeed are bitter? (I am not sure at this juncture anybody who had sold has reason to be bitter about their decision?) I think that BB's end up being social boards and these posts are just examples and excuses to say "I told you so". I really don't think for the vast majority of them, it goes any further or deeper than that.

Valuation is a very fluid thing. The reason I think that EVE was so highly valued at the time of the IPO and shortly afterwards was an belief that the Mattress market was disintegrated and made up a myriad of small companies that there looked to be an opportunity for a disrupter to take the market by storm and surprise, and capture a relatively dominant slice of it very quickly. This led to a very high valuation on the basis that while expensive today, in a few years not so much. and it was also tapping into the zeitgeist then of all things on line. So EVE ticked all of those boxes. Now a few years on a couple of things have occurred, the first being EVE already had like for like competition going into this market in the guises of Emma and others doing exactly, exactly the same thing with the same MO. So straight away the idea of being a USP disruptor hit a snag. The other was I guess, a misunderstanding by the then BOD of EVE in not understanding the costs of being an online business and the amount that has to be spent to draw customer to see your product online.
For the uninitiated the googles and other media platforms change the rules as to what companies have to do and spend to get up the ratings pages and every time, having spent a fortune to do that, they change the rules and you fall to page 2 which might as well be page 1 million, so the EVE's of this world have to continually start again. Its tiresome, time consuming and I used the word advisedly, cripplingly, expensive.
So, all of a sudden the valuation of 50 PER becomes unobtainably unrealistic. My guess fwiw is that a PER of about 10 seems to be ok, may be bit more if strong growth is demonstrated. So real back-of-a -fag-packet calc here, but for me as a kind of guide or goal, PER of 50 reduced to 10 on an SP once 100p = 20p because at the end of this, this is not a high tech product, it is a fragmented market that works on low margins and is very competitive. EVE obviously know all of this hence the branding or re-branding to something "more" than a mattress company. It makes sense but how many people/customers will buy into that? Who knows?
(Again, to justify where I come from in my thought process: Its why I never fall in love with a stock, how ever much I like what it does or how much money it makes me. Its just an opportunity to try and make some money off of that company's hard work. Mostly I see it as a window. Not only will it not last forever, it probably won't last that long in today's fast moving world.) The next leg of the rerate has to be pretty nailed on that next year it will be running profitably. I think there is a very strong likelihood hence I see another trebling of the SP over a short time frame. I think the market is beginning to trust CC as she delivers on what she says even or because of, the realistic utterances she makes in updates to the market. And that's not nothing, that's worth a lot, imo.

DG, Well it would be nice to think EVE could go back to 100p!!!!
Its, with hindsight, clear to see what happened and without retracing all of that, EVE are valued at about half to double what cash it has in the bank which is ludicrously low if it were making money but over priced if it is running at a loss.
And as we all know, EVE are bang in the middle: Running at a relatively small loss but very close to turning into a profitable business organisation. I think the valuation is bang on right now but, given that markets look ahead I think there is growing evidence that the company will soon be making money and then the re-rate takes place. I think that comes between now and the end of Jan. I have grown to appreciate through CC's actions and results, that she has a handle on what she is doing ( I don't want that to sound patronising but so many CEO's are often there due to circumstance rather than ability that always, always, actions speak louder than words), I the "inches rather than miles" quote has stuck with me and I think that is exactly what we are seeing. You can't wave a magic wand and suddenly turn a co. around particularly one that is staring bankruptcy in the face, it takes time and that's assuming the decisions taken are correct. I still like 15-20p in about 12-18 months once the Jan update shows the co is on track to make a few mil during the next financial year, if its slower than that then I can see this being a much longer buy and hold. So far very good, good consolidation, next we need a good Xmas with good to excellent ancillary sales so the market can see beyond mattresses.

What is telling is how often this type of comment and thread gets posted these days ie the surprise and bewilderment at the constant amount of rude and insulting posts that are generated by a relative few posters, how many tics it gets as support of a lot of people being fed up with it and it making no difference to the perpetrators.
And whatever reason is used to justify such crude responses is that it is easier and more economical to simply to ignore the post altogether. If a post is deemed to have no merit in the opinion of the reader, then by refusing to engage with it increases the speed in which the thread will die out and not clutter the board. If its a particular poster that irritates, then you filter. It so easy and obvious you do have wonder what it is actually all about as responding with crass remarks only keeps the nonsense going, which I unfortunately and am genuinely ashamed to say have been guilty of (and to all I apologise) but no more.