Biocartis « Terug naar discussie overzicht

Biocartis forum geopend

4.942 Posts, Pagina: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 ... 244 245 246 247 248 » | Laatste
Hopende
0
quote:

CGCDLR schreef op 6 juni 2021 09:05:


Nadat Abbott deze week waarschuwde voor een omzetdaling door de mindere verkoop van Covid gerelateerde tests kreeg de koers een opdoffer.Ook zo bij Therm Fisher.Volgens Seeking Alfa zijn die laatste op zoek naar M&A 's om hun omzet op peil te houden.Dit zou al koersondersteunend moeten zijn voor Biocartis.Aan de huidige koers zijn ze m.i.een "Sitting Duck".Hoog tijd dat de beloftes van de CEO eens concreet worden.Na jaren de lijdensweg met dit aandeel te moeten meemaken lopen we nu het risico dat Biocartis van de beurs wordt geplukt voor een habbekrats!

Ik begin daar toch voor te vrezen ze , hoeveel denk je dat we nog zouden krijgen voor ons aandelen zit aan goeie 7 met mij gak
DeZwarteRidder
0
quote:

Hopende schreef op 6 juni 2021 10:45:


[...]
Ik begin daar toch voor te vrezen ze , hoeveel denk je dat we nog zouden krijgen voor ons aandelen zit aan goeie 7 met mij gak


Ik denk dat je over ca 10 jaar je geld wel terug krijgt..................


Mits Biocartis voor die tijd niet failliet gaat.............
CGCDLR
0
De stelling( van FL) dat Biocartis met zo weinig mogelijk informatie naar buiten komt houdt geen steek meer.Dit om de concurrentie niet wakker te maken!De aandeelhouders informeren over hoe ver ze staan met de partners, Wondfucartis,Nichirei zou m.i.de rust doen terugkeren,de koers hoger helpen & een overname aan bradeerprijzen voorkomen.
Wilfro
0
Ik snap niet waarom er zijn die zich hier zo druk zitten te maken in die overname. Stel dat er inderdaad een grotere speler opduikt die de boel graag zou opkopen. Dan is het niet zo dat die plots even een telefoontje naar de CEO doet en zegt dat ie het 'eens even koopt hé'. Die beslissing ligt bij de aandeelhouders, zo'n 75% daarvan hebben geen meldingsplicht. lees: zijn kleine(re) beleggers.

Het is hier al meermaals aangehaald dat er vele van die kleine beleggers zijn ingestapt aan prijzen van 7 en meer. Het zijn die mensen die je gaat moeten overtuigen om hun aandelen te verkopen om uberhaupt kans te maken op die (vijandige) overname. Ik zie het niet zo snel gebeuren eigenlijk.
CGCDLR
0
Druk maken in een overname is niet aan de orde,maar dit kan nog komen.Wanneer Biocartis verder doet aan de huidige slakkengang is de kas medio 2022 leeg!Dan is er de keus tss een Ko, overname ( met een koers die rond de 1€ zal liggen) of een faillissement.De overname is dan gek genoeg nog de beste optie.Ook in dit geval kan je het been stijf houden en niet verkopen.De grote aandeelhouders Invesco12%,J&J 9,5%,Pmv4,5% zullen maar wat blij zijn dat ze de meut nog kunnen verpatsen.Reken daar de vorige week goedgekeurde 75% extra aandelen bij en je weet het wel,als kleine aandeelhouder ben je bekocht.Nu,zover moet het niet komen,KBC koersdoel 7,5€ vorige donderdag . Hopelijk zitten ze nu eens juist . Verhelst kan zich geen excuses meer veroorloven.
Hopende
0
quote:

CGCDLR schreef op 6 juni 2021 12:14:


De stelling( van FL) dat Biocartis met zo weinig mogelijk informatie naar buiten komt houdt geen steek meer.Dit om de concurrentie niet wakker te maken!De aandeelhouders informeren over hoe ver ze staan met de partners, Wondfucartis,Nichirei zou m.i.de rust doen terugkeren,de koers hoger helpen & een overname aan bradeerprijzen voorkomen.

daar kan ik mij in vinden
Hopende
1
artikel de tijd
Als we naar de Brusselse koerslijst kijken, zijn er 35 aandelen die meer dan een tiende lager bengelen dan begin februari vorig jaar, toen het Westen zich nog geen zorgen maakte om Covid-19. Sommige pandoeringen hebben niets te maken met corona, zoals de tuimeling met 70 procent voor Galapagos omdat de Amerikaanse geneesmiddelenwaakhond FDA weigerde het reumamiddel filgotinib goed te keuren. Er prijken opvallend veel biotechers bij de kneusjes. Door de pandemie liepen veel bedrijven vertraging op bij het rekruteren en testen van patiënten, maar het gros van de dalingen heeft te maken met individuele tegenvallers. De analisten zien het meest potentieel in Celyad dankzij zijn innovatief platform om kanker te bestrijden, en in Biocartis. Dat ziet na een zwakke periode de verkoop van zijn medische tests in de VS weer toenemen.
Kojo2
0
@ Hopende,

Ik heb mijn recent opgebouwde positie in Biocartis, gespreid over gisteren en vandaag, terug verkocht. Daar waar ik eerst dacht een deel aan te houden mocht de koers boven € 4,10 noteren, verkoos ik om snel winst te nemen (GAK € 3,86 en GVK € 4,13) omdat de koersstijging onvoldoende overtuigend is.

Hopelijk kan Biocartis met positief nieuws komen over de verkoopcijfers zodat de koers kan herstellen tot jouw aankoopprijs.

Ik blijf het aandeel volgen voor het geval er zich terug koopkansen voordoen.
Hopende
0
quote:

Kojo2 schreef op 10 juni 2021 14:57:


@ Hopende,

Ik heb mijn recent opgebouwde positie in Biocartis, gespreid over gisteren en vandaag, terug verkocht. Daar waar ik eerst dacht een deel aan te houden mocht de koers boven € 4,10 noteren, verkoos ik om snel winst te nemen (GAK € 3,86 en GVK € 4,13) omdat de koersstijging onvoldoende overtuigend is.

Hopelijk kan Biocartis met positief nieuws komen over de verkoopcijfers zodat de koers kan herstellen tot jouw aankoopprijs.

Ik blijf het aandeel volgen voor het geval er zich terug koopkansen voordoen.


ik moet jammer genoeg blijven zitten want op de duur moet ik alles laten gaan met te veel verlies , hopende op betere tijden ;)
Stefzele1
0
Flatlander
1
Been away the past week and took a break from posting. There are two points I thought I should respond to:

1st - Most takeovers occur when the acquisition is accretive to earnings of the acquirer or will be in the next year or so. Some of the same posters saying that BCART will not be profitable until after 2024 are now immediately worried about a take out. The shareholder base is very fragmented, nothing occurs without the majority being in agreement. I haven't checked recently but it would probably take the top 10 or more shareholders to reach the majority threshold. Oppenheimer/Invesco tend to be very long term minded so I don't think they would be quick to sell out to a lowball offer.

2nd - With regard to BCARTs lack of PR statements, I have postulated that BCART is not highlighting any information that deals with the schedule of the release of new products in new geographies (say EGFR in China) since it could tip off competition to try to saturate market their product before the Idylla product release. I don't see any information in the previous posts that show why this theory is wrong. All one has to do is review the GenomicWeb site to see how hyper competitive this market is. The BCART PRs are often few and far between. If you feel you need hand holding to get through the news doldrums, I'd reach out to Renate. I've found her to generally be responsive to specific questions. Obviously she could not comment on acquisitions.

BCART is not currently doing much in the way of promotional investment bank presentations or technical conferences (No ASCO presentations, we'll have to see about AMP), It might be worth finding out why are they not doing dog and pony presentations? Other companies are doing this remotely, so Covid is not a great excuse. My hope is that the next cash raise comes from a NASDAQ filing. I think the visibility increase would be worth the dilution.

The relentless selling seems to have abated since the end of May. I've been looking for a transparency statement but thus far nothing. The seller(s) may have stopped short of a threshold.

Finally, ImmunExpress seems to be ramping up Septicyte Rapid twitter posts. I'm expecting FDA approval in the next two weeks.

FL
Thole
0
Thanks for the response and welcome back. Personally, don't necessarily need to have a lot of press releases, but I am of course always very curious. :D
Flatlander
0
Anyone else think the PR statement about the Tagrisso China approval for early stage lung cancer goes out of its way to state that the Roche Cobas MDx used for the study but does not state that it is the recommended or the approved CDx test for the EGFR mutation.

AstraZeneca's Tagrisso Approved in China for Adjuvant Treatment of EGFR-Mutated NSCLC
Apr 14, 2021 | staff reporter

Save for later
NEW YORK – China's National Medical Products Administration has approved AstraZeneca's osimertinib (Tagrisso) for the adjuvant treatment of EGFR-mutated, early-stage non-small cell lung cancer following surgery.

The NMPA approved the adjuvant indication for osimertinib based on the results of the Phase III ADAURA trial, in which the drug reduced the risk of disease recurrence or death by 83 percent among patients with stage II to IIIa NSCLC compared to placebo, and by 80 percent in the overall trial population with stage Ib to IIIa disease. The disease-free survival advantage on osimertinib was consistent among patients regardless of whether they received adjuvant chemotherapy, and whether they were Asian and non-Asian.

In the study, patients had to have tumors driven by EGFR exon 19 deletions or exon 21 (L858R) mutations. Researchers used Roche's cobas EGFR Mutation Test in a central lab to establish patients' EGFR mutation status. China carries a third of the world's lung cancer burden, and 40 percent of Chinese patients with NSCLC have EGFR-mutated tumors.

"The expedited approval of Tagrisso in China as part of a curative-intent regimen for early-stage EGFR-mutated lung cancer underscores the high unmet need in this setting and our commitment to improving outcomes in a country with one of the highest rates of EGFR mutations in the world," Dave Fredrickson, executive VP of AstraZeneca's oncology business unit, said in a statement. "This approval reinforces the importance of EGFR testing across all stages of lung cancer, prior to treatment decisions, to ensure as many patients as possible can benefit from targeted therapies like Tagrisso and live cancer-free longer."

This osimertinib indication, which received priority review from the NMPA's Center for Drug Evaluation, is the third approval for the drug in China, after second-line, EGFR T790M-driven NSCLC and first-line, EGFR-mutated NSCLC. Regulators in a more than a dozen countries, including in the US, have approved osimertinib in the adjuvant NSCLC setting based on the ADAURA data.

The WondfoCartis announcement from May certainly opens the door for a China Idylla CDx.
www.wondfocartis.com/news/aid/88/cid/...
FL
euroke
0
Ik blijf in hun kwaliteitsproduct geloven. Alhoewel de slakkengang van de koers menig belegger zijn geduld zwaar op de proef stelde, denk ik dat (met deftige vertraging) er nog altijd een succesverhaal in de maak kan zijn. Proficiat Flatlander voor je ongelooflijke "kijk op de zaak". (en ook aan alle anderen natuurlijk)
Flatlander
0
Euroke
Certainly, no congratulations can be accepted after a sizeable loss, but due to position sizing it does not have any bearing on my standard of living etc. This was always a 10X or bust (or loss) type of investment. BCART has a potentially disruptive technology but it is fighting headwinds of huge better funded competitors. If they follow the path of a Cepheid then it can churn out considerable SP growth over the next decade. My view is that it is too early to pull the plug and move on since they are on the cusp of their first assay registrations in several major new geographies (US, China, Japan, etc). They have already incurred much of the cost to position Idylla in these markets (US sales force, joint venture costs, etc...). To drop out now right before it is time for their partners to demonstrate their worth by marketing Idylla, could be a colossal mistake. That said we are fighting an ugly chart. This is a market that is finding it increasingly difficult to trade on stories of future opportunity. BCART needs to turn the corner and strongly deliver on the growth inflection they have promised for this year.

I anticipate that we will enter a period of mixed news. The announcement of new geography product registration will probably be used as an opportunity to raise funds. My bet is that the market will be able to accept news of dilution if it is introduced with announcement of major China registration for BMS and AZN CDxs and the establishment of a 3rd very low cost manufacturing line in China.

PS: My reason for the previous post is that while BCART has released little in the way of specific news, it appears that they may have timed their late April release in Belgium and the early May release in China so that investors can connect the dots to a Idylla CDx release in China. Cepheid has shown that emerging markets tend to be quite receptive to decentralized solutions like their GenExpert system or BCART's Idylla system.

A lot of conjecture, we'll see what pans out.
FL
OzDx
0
I've been reading up on articles published in the last couple of years. Many articles talk positively about incorporating Idylla as a part of their testing workflow. Turning point is just around the corner imo. The new geography product registration will be the catalyst for explosive growth imo. I, for one, am enjoying the slow decline in SP. It gives me more opportunities to continue to add.
Flatlander
0
OzDx
I've often emphasized papers that have flowcharted how Idylla can be integrated into a testing facility's work flow. It seems that these periods of news doldrums are often accompanied by lower drifting share price.

You're in the industry, to what extent do you perceive that BCART's lack of PR is associated with the fact that they seek to disrupt certain areas of the MDx lab (Sanger sequencing, Pyrosequencing, etc) with a product that automates many of the steps. How much push back occurs just due to inertia or resistance to change? I've often wondered if the natural product traction will be better in geographies where Ifylla is seeking to disrupt existing MDx testing processes or in emerging markets where they have little existing MDx infrastructure and are largely starting up with a clean slate. I think Idylla is a cheap ticket for some EM markets to start introducing MDx. The economies in these EM markets are better able to afford a single gene mutation assay rather than whole genome NGS analyses.
The other natural fit would seem to be in surveillance, where a patient is receiving treatment but needs to be monitored frequently for the development of mutations that would make the treatment less effective. I believe this type of monitoring is better conducted using cheaper decentralized testing. The fact that Idylla simplifies the results interpretation should make this type of analysis more accessible.

BCART has pointed to 2021 as being the year that the growth inflection point becomes apparent. I don't know to what extent COVID has affected this schedule. I can argue both ends that it might slow or accelerate adoption rates. Either way, I also believe that BCART is on the cusp and that the registrations will be the catalyst.

FL
Kojo2
0
@ Stefzele,
@ Hopende,

Nu bevestigd wordt dat het koersherstel van de laatste dagen zich niet kan doorzetten hou ik me klaar om terug in Biocartis te stappen. Liefst onder de € 3,90, voor een kort ritje van 4 à 5%.
Flatlander
0
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC...

I have on numerous occasions stated that COVID was likely driving changes in lab protocols that prioritize automation and less personnel working in close proximity to each other. I found the attached article that bears this out . The following paragraph demonstrate (at least in this specific Italian lab) what I have been saying about the pandemic accelerating the trend toward automation in MDx.

"The number of patients undergoing biomarker testing in 2020 (45) was similar to that of the same period of 2019 (43). The patient and sample characteristics are reported in table 1. Molecular analysis was successfully carried out in 42 (97.7%) out of 43 samples and 41 (91.1%) out of 45 samples for the 2019 and 2020 group, respectively. The adopted molecular platforms differed (figure 1); the vast majority of cases in 2019 were analysed by NGS (32/42, 76.2%), followed by Idylla (4/42, 9.5%), NGS plus Tape Station (3/42, 7.1%), Tape Station alone (2/42, 4.8%) and conventional RT-PCR (1/42, 2.4%). During the outbreak, to allow laboratory staff rotation, the genotyping laboratory workflow was completely reshaped, and the fully automated platform was prioritised to minimise biotechnologist hand-on times. Thus, in 2020, almost all cases were analysed by Idylla (38/41, 92.7%), and the remaining cases were analysed by NGS (3/41, 7.3%). The results, in terms of type and frequency of detected alterations, relative to assays performed, are reported in online supplementary table 1. As far as predictive IHC is concerned, no differences were reported in the methodological approach between the two periods, and the relative results are reported in online supplementary table 1."

"Fully automated technologies are advancing at a rapid pace.16 In normal times, this technology has usually been considered as second class, to be ‘segregated’ in small laboratories featuring limited workload and lacking skilled and trained staff.17 In larger and academic institutions, as previously reported, this technology was considered only when acute deteriorating patients needed urgent treatment or when nucleic acid quality was unsuitable for NGS.18 However, in the time of COVID-19, LDTs based on several sequential steps and requiring long hands on time are more difficult to be carried out; fully automated technologies can be prioritised to ensure accurate biomarker evaluation and sustainable laboratory activity. Indeed, we should rethink and re-evaluate the value originally assigned to each laboratory staff working hour, being aware that the time spent by a biotechnologist in the laboratory is today more precious than before.11 12 In fact, it should be borne in mind that a critical attitude is required to interpret and validate the results. In our experience, the possibility for a highly trained molecular pathologist to visually inspect the RT-PCR curves online, thanks the web-based Idylla Explore application, is crucial.19 In fact, although most cases (95%) were diagnosed by the fully automated approach only, on some occasions, NGS was still carried out to refine uncertain results displaying RT-PCR curves of undetermined interpretation.20"

FL
4.942 Posts, Pagina: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 ... 244 245 246 247 248 » | Laatste
Aantal posts per pagina:  20 50 100 | Omhoog ↑

Meedoen aan de discussie?

Word nu gratis lid of log in met uw e-mailadres en wachtwoord.

Direct naar Forum

Detail

Vertraagd 3 dec 2021 17:35
Koers 3,620
Verschil -0,090 (-2,43%)
Hoog 3,715
Laag 3,615
Volume 45.332
Volume gemiddeld 44.973
Volume gisteren 69.869