Advanced Oncotherapy Share Discussion Threads

[pyglet] 19/8/2016 17:17

In my post 2208the worst word in that paragraph is 'hope'. They must have a feeling in their water on how it is going and maybe put out a clarification RNS. Now what harm would that do?

[igbertsponk] 19/8/2016 16:46

If I was a shareholder I'd be asking them quite vociferously why they (or HdeW)don't appear to be engaging with the local residents and putting them at ease over their concerns.
But I'm not.

[pyglet] 19/8/2016 16:30

This was the response I had:The planning application is still in progress, we are working closely with the Howard de Walden Estate on this. We hope to be able to make an announcement in September.

[pyglet] 19/8/2016 16:28

Alton. The response needs to come from AVO not Walbrook really although one does represent the other it is not really the same.

[altom] 19/8/2016 16:13

I emailed AVO expressing concern that the Harley St. project will be delayed or cancelled.
I received a reply from Anna Dunphy of Walbrook saying that the H.St. project is on track to complete on time and there are no problems to report.
You cannot be more definite than that.

[daijavu] 19/8/2016 14:02

waterloo01 and IgbertSponk. In that case, it all boils down to planning permission for Harley Street.

We will have to wait and see.

[igbertsponk] 19/8/2016 12:40

daijavu - as I've said repeatedly, I like the tech and am considering an investment. But don't think the current price reflects the risks of time slippage and the various dilutions that will happen.

[waterloo01] 19/8/2016 12:31

daijavu, It's not 'my problem' however the the China orders are predicated on Harley St being up and open, the £11m loan has a date stamp running and they will need to raise the balance. All of which look at risk. If they were just sellers of the tech it would be much simpler.

[daijavu] 19/8/2016 12:19

Iggy. Why are you bothering to post here?

[igbertsponk] 19/8/2016 12:13

twirl - I'm not here to answer your questions ta.

I see you're all suggesting a novel approach to selling now where no product is available to demonstrate.... good luck with that.

[daijavu] 19/8/2016 11:20

waterloo. As twirl says, AVO's business is producing and selling LIGHT. Harley Street is merely a venue to showcase the product. Other venues will present themselves if it becomes unavailable.

What is your problem with that?

[waterloo01] 19/8/2016 10:53

Twirl, I did hold and have not bought back in and will only consider doing so once Harley St has an open date. I keep an interest and post as I'm still interested in the company not because I hope the share price will fall, but as recent investor. As I said I will only invest again once there is clarity.

If raising legitimate concerns is deramping, so be it.

[twirl] 19/8/2016 10:29

Unfortunately the Harley St project provides a welcome opportunity for the de rampers such as waterloo001, Igbert and possibly atom to cast doubt and fear amongst those holders who have short time horizons or are ignorant about AVO. Such derampers do this in the hope that those investors will sell allowing others to buy in at a lower level.

The main purpose of AVO is to develop, manufacture,sell and maintain LIGHT machines. The main business is not to manage care provision such as Harley St or Pebble Mill. That is what Michael Sinclair said at the AGM. The outcome of the testing is therefore of paramount importance and the planning application is not.

However an unsuccessful planning outcome would be taken as an opportunity to depress the share price by the market and will provide a buying opportunity. I do not expect an unsuccessful outcome as AVO have never failed to deliver.

Derampers typically do not own shares in the company and post out of apparantly altruistic motives to warn holders of the dangers of holding the stock.

The response of Igbert to my Q re the most substantive issue for AVO demonstrated his/her ignorance of AVO. Igbert failed to say successful testing of LIGHT - go to the bottom of the class Igbert.

The failure by atom to substantiate his/her rumour re planning again undermines integrity.

Waterloo001 either has sold up or has never held and is looking to buy in at a lower price - otherwise I salute you waterloo001 for you altruistic concerns for the welfare of AVO shareholders.

[daijavu] 19/8/2016 09:06

I just wondered if you had anything more substantive to say.

[waterloo01] 19/8/2016 08:27

I think I've stated that clearly in earlier posts.

[daijavu] 19/8/2016 08:26

Waterloo. On what do you base your opinion?

[waterloo01] 18/8/2016 21:59

Interestingly I was in the area today, and while I didn't find the time to visit the AVO site, I did notice a large De Walden project a few streets away. From the streets behind it's clear they have completely demolished 3/4 Georgian buildings (leaving the facades) but a complete hollow behind. Shows that in the right location (mainly non residential), they can get these things done. (Doesn't change my view however as to the AVO site and timeline).

[twirl] 18/8/2016 20:02

Well atom where did you hear the "roumers" as thats a description usually attributed to someone with an agenda spreading false "roumers".

I don't see why AVO should issue a progress report on Harley St until there is something to say and that will be determined by the Council.

Until then I do not think their plans and timeframes for Harley St are "impossible" - rather a sweeping statement by you - based on what - 2 derampers on this BB?

[altom] 18/8/2016 00:13

Waterloo and daijavu.
Thanks for comments. I don't disagree. I still think that the co. should issue an update since they last said H.St. would be up and running by end 2017 and to most shareholders that now seems impossible.
I am a committed investor here but feel the company is very economical with information.

[daijavu] 17/8/2016 21:36

For what it is worth, while I agree that not having Harley Street would be a setback, I believe that it should not be enough of a setback to stop the LIGHT project in its tracks. I think there are too many people with too much money invested in it and too much committed to it for it to be allowed to fail. LIGHT should be fully tested by the end of this year and I would expect an alternative home would be found for it, possibly with Circle in the UK or perhaps in one of the two hospitals contracted in China. It would obviously mean a delay and there might well be financial implications but I cannot see the loss of Harley Street proving more than a nuisance. AVO has spent little or no money on Harley Street so the cash earmarked for it could be realocated to a new site if de Walden are unable to fulfill their part of the Harley Street contract.

The really critical factor is LIGHT. If it works, its potential would completely dwarf the loss of Harley Street. The questions of early development costs and early years payments to directors should also fade into insignificance in due course.

As for 141/143 Harley Street itself, I cannot see de Waldon allowing it to stand empty for long. They plan to develop Harley Street as a world class medical centre so if the building does not house LIGHT it will probably house some other medical facility. The development would probably cause the residence just as much inconvenience as the work needed for LIGHT.

Given that the residents will almost inevitably have to put up with construction work anyway and LIGHT would probably give out hardly any more radiation than the Xray machine in the dental clinics that are to be found in every high street, the objections might seem rather pointless. They are unlikely to achieve any thing more than delay the LIGHT project and are unlikely to save them from future construction work in the MEWS or medical traffic in and out of the building for some other medical facility.

[twirl] 17/8/2016 14:43

i think its testing LIGHT

[igbertsponk] 17/8/2016 13:47

They need to engage with the residents, offer some concessions. Because the residents seem angry. I've been through many a contentious planning process, and having a battle with the locals is never sensible.

Igbert - What do you think the substantive issue is with AVO

For me its currently too expensive, doesn't price in either the massive dilution from options, profit shares etc. Or the likelihood of delays.