Advanced Oncotherapy Share Discussion Threads

[scantrader] 10/1/2017 10:58

Oh well - I see gerhart at least is someone who doesn't read the LSE board, so I'll paste this from over there

Ramping before a big fund raising?Today 06:09

Are you guys really not rather suspicious about all the company ramping recently?

The new promo video on the website.

The significant holder's small percentage increase that I don't think needed an RNS declaration.

The director buys – little ones eked out day by day for maximum effect on the share price

(Note how the naïve/ramper posters would obligingly comment on how much faith he must have in the company/ he knows its worth if anyone does etc. In fact the expected share price increase more than compensates for his purchases and pushing up the share price means that the placing price in a fund raising – and thus the value of his overall holding - is likely to be that much higher .)

The upcoming invitation to the site for analysts being talked about.

Re- hashing of old news and spin about how LIGHT is better than legacy machines. (Who cares?
They won't be competing with those, yet they know that a lot of private investors will assume in a sloppy way that they are. At least they spared us the old football pitch v bus analogy this time though.)

[gerhart] 10/1/2017 10:47

I think TW is going to have real difficulty making a negative case here at the moment because of the recent NED regular buying and also, perhaps particularly, because of Segulah's buying.

They know the company from "the inside", and wouldn't be chucking money down the drain.

[scantrader] 10/1/2017 10:04

New article from TW

[igbertsponk] 10/1/2017 09:45

Financing can't be happening at the moment, or the Director wouldn't be allowed to be buying shares (assuming that they decided to follow the rules for a change).

[waterloo01] 10/1/2017 09:24

More to the point, what happened to the financing update promised by end 2016?

[scantrader] 10/1/2017 09:21

I've put some new posts for anyone interested over on the LSE board for anyone who doesn't follow that board closely.

[daijavu] 06/1/2017 11:14

Ticking up nicely this morning.

[scantrader] 04/1/2017 14:26

Succinctly put Twirl. Having closed most of my short position here a while back

I now find I can't re-open one anywhere. Irritating - I should have hedged rather than

closed.

[twirl] 04/1/2017 08:44

Failure to meet testing and financing timetables indicates delay and funding issues with further dilution or hard ball debt.

[waterloo01] 04/1/2017 08:33

I'm out again. Happy with 30% return and suspect quite a lot of 'pressure' if it gets close to £1.00 last placing price. Best of luck.

[cosmicboy] 03/1/2017 16:47

Did'nt I read somewhere he TW had a cold over Christmas and was unable to attend church Christmas day?

[gerhart] 03/1/2017 12:07

Looks like good old Dr Vanni was back in there yet again at just after 9.00 this morning. This time putting down his 87 pence per share. Obviously very keen.

[gerhart] 03/1/2017 08:52

...it had a good Christmas period too.

So anyone that went away for a nice long Christmas break, leaving behind an open "short" on this, might not have a very happy start to their new trading year!

[someuwin] 03/1/2017 08:36

Good start

[vatnabrekk] 01/1/2017 18:28

Thanks scantrader, I had missed that.
I think if he had more emails in his possession he would have publicised them by now, but I might be wrong of course. Time will tell, I have no doubt.

[vatnabrekk] 31/12/2016 09:33

gerhart: "BTW - whatever happened to TW's planned Christmas bombshell on AVO? Anyone seen anything?"

Yes indeed, I was also wondering about that. Perhaps he's had an injunction slapped on him, or maybe the leaked emails turned out to be false. But it is certainly strange that he hasn't mentioned AVO in any shape or form since then. I'm sure something will come out in due course.

[freddythefish] 30/12/2016 10:29

gerhart:

"And who knows, maybe Segulah will loan us whatever funds we need! (small beer to them it sounds!)"

That's actually my worry. If that were to happen there would certainly be a (massive) price tag attached (in terms of their increased ownership).......

However, it's the end of the year so maybe time for a bit of blue sky (forgive me...):

I've always had misgivings regarding AVO's ambitions to be a manufacturer of complex, capitally intensive medical devices (I know they're outsourcing - and doing it smartly - but they still own the process and all the responsibilities that go with it.

Segulah seem to pride themselves on getting involved with management and guiding them in appropriate directions. I'm wondering if it isn't time for an ARM type approach where AVO/ADAM concentrate on developing and proving the technology, then licensing it out to manufacturing partners (of course their agreements with CERN may preclude this)?

There's still plenty of technology development to do (they could engineer post-fit extensions to existing cyclotron devices plus there's the carbon ion stuff, let alone the continual innovation of their core technology. There's all the software stuff too which can be highly lucrative).

It would be much less capitally intensive and would lead to a much faster acceptance in the market.

Manufacturing at this level is hard. Existing players (Hitachi, Varian, IBA etc) are very experienced here.

Maybe Segulah will try to push them this way?

Like I said - blue sky stuff - but there's more than one way to skin this cat, once the technology is proven (which may not be that far off now)

[gerhart] 30/12/2016 09:57

Daijavu/Freddy, I understand your point. But to be realistic I don't think there is going to be a takeover here any time soon. By the time that day comes, I hope that we are all back in a wee bit of profit at least!

....thought it was only about 75-80% for forced takeover. So if it is 90%, then all the earlier big holders will definitely want a nice profit on their shares.

I am just hoping we keep going north. And who knows, maybe Segulah will loan us whatever funds we need! (small beer to them it sounds!)

[freddythefish] 30/12/2016 00:41

AIUI in order to force a compulsory sale of shareholder's shares a (takeover) bidder is required (by the city takeover code) to own (or have acceptances for) over 90% of a company's shares.

If you look at AVO's shareholder register:



There are some chunky holders who would have to be onside if Segulah were to make a bid.

But daijavu is right, it is reasonable to question the nature of their interest - and the board will certainly know this. I wonder if they will tell us?

[daijavu] 29/12/2016 23:13

I agree that they have held AVO shares for some time and are merely topping up at the moment. However, they describe themselves as;

"Segulah is a Nordic private equity firm. We currently manage approximately SEK 8 billion, mainly from international pension funds, endowments and private family foundations, in three funds: Segulah III L.P., Segulah IV L.P. and Segulah V L.P.

Essentially, we develop companies. We want to make good companies better – and thereby create value.

Segulah is a medium-term owner with a goal of creating change and sustainable value over a period of five to seven years. We aim to make our companies more profitable – for example, by broadening their operations or through geographic expansion and acquisitions. We initiate and support their development by serving as an active, committed and responsible owner by appointing boards that support our portfolio companies’ managements and contribute to their development, and by providing capital. Prospective board directors are recruited from our network of industrial advisors."

In short, they take over target companies, become the owners and replace existing boards of directors with their own people.

Nothing wrong with that except for the small fact that if they do decide make a takeover bid for AVO and obtain sufficient support, they will be able to compulsorily purchase all our shares. There will then be no shareholders. We will have to surrender our shares and will not be the beneficiaries of their largess. The beneficiaries will be the international pension funds, endowments and private family foundations they represent.

It is reasonable to question the nature of their interest in AVO.

[gerhart] 29/12/2016 22:34

Not sure that is entirely, or at all, fair Daijavu. Remember they already held 3mil shares before today's purchase. But I have no idea at what price. Nothing wrong with "topping up" at lower SP!

Also if Freddythefish has directed to correct website, I think it looks quite positive. But the future knows the truth!

[daijavu] 29/12/2016 19:51

Unless I am missing something, Segulah is a bottom feeder that buys up all the shares of companies like AVO at a pittance and sells them on at an enormous profit. Segulah's interest is not necessarily anything to be welcomed by existing small shareholders. I doubt that we will benefit from anything that Segulah does even if AVO's chances of success are improved.

an old saying is: Be careful what you wish for. You might get it.

[gerhart] 29/12/2016 17:25

I wonder in the absence of his promised Christmas bombshell, and the recent buying, will TW change his stance now.

Logically it is nonsense for him to tell his customers or readers that AVO shares are uninvestiable, when people with "inside" (in a broad sense!) knowledge of the company are putting susbstantial sums of money down.

[waterloo01] 29/12/2016 16:44

Taken a small position at 66p on the back of Segulah. This does not mean I have changed my view on the shambles they are running, just there might be some value.