Member Info for wyndrum

I'm not sure what you mean Doh but the Monday RNs was new information and it has changed my time frame.
Prior to Monday I thought we would literally have a BAMS validation RNS any day and thought it was already overdue. Because of all the talk here of NDA's I also assumed that AVCT were much further along with the covid validation.
What Monday said is that Bams is (still) being validated but we already knew that. And that the covid test is at least weeks away if not months but its hard to say because no times now are given. The RNS was a holding statement trying to manage expectations to a longer timeframe having whipped them up again in late September.
The RNS on Monday also seemed to raise questions through omission of other manufacturers and the much lauded Saliva test has been replaced or at best noe is in tandom with a nostril test but no explanation of why. Given AS's penchant of over exaggerating the "good" news, the fact that there are no explanations given suggest to me that there is no good news in these areas to exaggerate over.
Basically this quarter its Bams (which should be very good news) completing validation and the confirmation over human dose trials, which has been so extensively trailed all year so although good news, will not make any difference to the SP as far as I can see.
So my view has changed based on new information. Certainly there is no FOMO on this stock any more. (The only FOMO vibe that does exists has proven to be falsely generated by rampers on this board).
What seemed to me (AVCT)a slam dunk in June in terms of a high performance covid test being released "shortly", is now what it has always been, a high risk small pharma operation that if it comes good could produce fantastic returns but as always, the bigger the risk the bigger the prize.

Zeremy, I think part of your conclusion is correct when you say "Boris is showing his intent to use a LFT that is manufactured in the UK …" The next bit "and there seems to be strong agreement that Avacta will have the best product."
Says who? AS? We have a product that as of Monday had not even begun a 2 part validation process. (And indeed that process can't start until BBi have finished their particular validation process.) The whole point of validation is to see that lab results are replicated in bigger trials. Given what's happened to recent vaccines I would not say its a given yet (I very much hope it is) for AVCT.
Unfortunately for whatever reasons, but AS has a track record for over promising and under delivering so far, it makes it difficult to take his words as balanced. I understand this. Its his job to paint the company in the best possible light, but at the same time we should be a little more wary of assuming that he is exaggerating. Given the latest RNS had some hope in it, there ended up being more questions then answers raised and that does not bode well for short term developments.
I personally think the validation will probably but not certainly, be completed very late Q4 and possibly Jan Q1. From there Govt contracts have to be tendered for and won. This assumes that AVCT LFT is as good as AS has eluded to, but we don't know that yet. (because its not been validated) and I think it will Mid to late Q1 before the test will be available, another 3 months in other words. I think BAMS will be the first announcement as that is in validation but again I have no idea how long it takes and the RNS was not helpful in when it would be completed either.
I think when these products do come to market they will be successful but I think the covid testing market will be saturated and the scope for AVCT is less that I had hoped for 3 months ago.
What we seem to overlook is that there is mass testing going on all over the world right now and it is reducing the R number.
The overwhelming factual evidence you refer to suggests that there are many weeks and months to go before AVCT will have a test to offer the market. Lets hope it is as good as promised because right now we only have the word of AS.

Ok Zeremy, based on what facts?

Doh, How do you define the word "hope"? Do you use the word hope in a factual way that you know something will happen, or more in a wishful way, ie nothing to substantiate it , but it would be nice?
Eventually? If I said we would eventually become good friends, do you think that means later today or some, undefined time in the future?

Zeremy: "Hope: a feeling of expectation and desire for a particular thing to happen.
Eventually: in the end, especially after a long delay, dispute, or series of problems.

What was laid on a plate is that currently Boris does not have or can see in the near future, a british solution:

The Derampers are winning because AVCT has been slow to get to market every product they have in the pipeline based on AS's own estimation. For that they are told usually "sell up and ef off"
The Rampers keep posting absurd, inaccurate and over the top forecasts. Bams was the topic last weekend, "We are definitely in the tender" has been this weeks one.
Derampers are accused of making people sell their shares shouldn't. Rampers never seem to get the same accusation of making people buy the stock on false promises.
This board, having quickly discussed any actual development (which is probably half a dozen posts), then just plays the man instead of the post and it gets spiteful and mean.
And for what? Its so pointless.
The SP will determine the news.. When you see the SP up or down 20% there will be real news that its based on. You won't see it here first.

I Don't want to get into an argument with you DOH, but you chewed me out a bit and the thread in particular about how bored you were with it all because you just wanted facts. Now all of a sudden you want to discuss if its "us" or not?
Well, I can't see how can it be, because we haven't even had validation of a test so how can it be?
So whoever it is (and I still think Innover is the most likely, because they have had time to tweak their tests after all the weeks of trialling it), nothing points to AVCT.
RNS update on Monday with no timelines except whenever, presumably in Q4 but i'm guessing now validation very end of Q4, roll out some time in Q1, BOJO saying already Huge stockpiles available and as vague as he could possibly be about a UK solution at some stage in the undisclosed future.

More likely his IQ.....

Not meaning to sound rude GB, but just read the RNS's. This has been flagged for some time about when it was to happen and why.

Well, I have taken his advice and bought another £50k's worth... (Well he started it)

More importantly (well not importantly), but is that not insider trading and he should be reported and prosecuted for it?

AI, I did that at 150p

read that back to me again Wiley: "wyndrum - you are looking at things from an investor wanting to make money viewpoint" you bet.

I am not asking them to update the market when they fart (why is everything here so base...?) I think its reasonable to suggest that it is market sensitive news whether or not we have a test available. If we are tendering for a contract it would mean we have. if we don't, we haven't. Either way it will cause a (I think) substantial shift in the SP, more so if we do have a test rather than if we don't.
I don't see it either as contentious or unreasonable but others do, so I will bow out now.

5C there must ne a gazillion shares in issue so even after the consolidation I don't think liquidity will be a problem. (More likely its just MM's don't want to hold such a risky stock so have a big spread on it to mitigate risk on their part?)

DOH, I understand where you are coming from and the boring, futility of this thread but here's the thing: If all you are interested in are results, then you don't need this board either to read or reply on, because the results will be there and there is nothing else to discuss.
Cityone had a bullish POV. I have asked one question of him/her to explain how he/she got to their conclusion about being included in this tender. Others have joined in and I have responded.
I don't mind if people find threads or indeed me boring, each to his own, thats fine, but it is slightly irksome to be told that its all so boring, in which case, don't respond or if its me just press the filter button. Many thanks

yes GB, the shares have gone down by 6.63%

Honestly DOH, I have no idea how important 30% or more of £912m is to AVCT in the testing scheme of things but I am guessing its not nothing but lets ignore that for now. My question was simply, to the poster Cityone, how was he so confident and sure that AVCT were in this tender on the back of nothing tangible and indeed that no news was in fact disguising the fact we were or would be included.
And I would also perhaps make the point that you would not be quite so bored of this topic if it turns out AVCT get a £300m contract win in 2 weeks

SleepyD: Really?
How long does it take to run a small scale validation?
How long does it take then afterwards to run a large scale validation?
As of Monday we had not even started.
How long does it take to enter the data into the tender?
I have no idea. How long has Bams taken to be validated?
I understand fully that after this tender, there will be others that hopefully we will be in a position to compete on.
I just don't get how a silence from AVCT coupled with no validated tests even underway gets translated by many here to we are in the tender. It was the certainty of the Title thread "Avacta will be in the tender" followed by a very bullish post (which is fine, I have no argument with different POV) that I was just trying to get to the bottom of as it seems to me there is more evidence that we will not be in it than in. How is that over thinking it?

wiggly, you are right, but do we even know if we have passed the "futility" test?
Liverpool is seen by the govt as a success. Based on the current info I think Innova are favourites to win it simply because they are already being bought and as others have said buyers tend to stick with suppliers they know. The "tender" could just be smokescreen to show the govt put it out there so as to show it was a "free & fair" process given the corruption that is being unearthed in the previous decision making on awarding contracts.
Its all speculation on both our parts, and I just think it should not be this way on such a price sensitive topic, (which in turn enforces my view that we are likely not to have submitted a test for this one)

So come Tender results day and lets say Avacta don't get anything. Will we even know that they were in it? The assumptions here I would say are about 75% avacta have tendered. What then? There will not be an RNS to say we did not win a contract and as there has been no info to say we even were in the tender, the inference would have to be, we still haven't got a test.
What do you think the SP will do then?
If we however, we did get something from the tender, then why was the market not informed we had a test available earlier when the SP rockets?
Either way, whether or not we tender is price sensitive and the market should know this info.
I have no idea where we are after the RNS but I would be surprised if AVCT can start a small scale validation and when that's completed a large scale validation has to get underway and be completed and then get the data into the tender process in time. and coupled with no confirming information from AVCT I am amazed that the majority are assuming we are in it. (The assumptions generally from the RNS and regarding this tender specifically, that no news means there is positive news behind the scenes deliberately being kept from the market, is a leap too far for me regarding this matter).

HA! Good point Bruce, (for some reason I have been 1 day ahead of myself all week.....)