We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
AB,
Spot on - exactly what I have been saying.
The communication with the shareholder base has, as ever, been almost nonexistent.
Douve87
I have sympathy with your comments on Data, but Scancell has no Current data on (Particularly Moditope of any significant variety). I think that what is needed to maximise IP value is significant, fresh, up to the minute Data on where the various developments are and then (and only then) can the assets of the company come firmly into play. To achieve that costs a great deal of money. That money is available, BUT for some unknown reason the BOD is divided. It would be helpful if the naysayer/s would step up to the plate tell the shareholders what their problem is. I find it difficult to make a value judgement without knowing both sides. So rather than a resoned, informed judgement we are being asked to decide without all the information. In that situation do we simply say NO and then have our US backer possibly walk away or commit no further funds than already invested, or do we accept the cash available and hope that the BOD will somehow change from the history we know about and get real and effective development underway? Don't see much of a problem really, it seems a vote yes gives shareholders a chance, a vote no hands effective control of Scancell to those who seek to disrupt the progress whislt staying in the shadows and simply refusing to put their case up for consideration. It's a painful situation to be confronted by, but I'm not prepared to put my investment in the hands of those who want to disrupt a major cash injection but won't say why.
They always put that 10% buyback in... It does not mean that is what they are planning on doing :)
Re Vulpes, see: https://www.scancell.co.uk/Data/Sites/1/media/publications/rns/result-of-open-offer-and-adjournment-of-general-meeting-oct-2020.pdf
"Votes received against these resolutions were from a very small number of shareholders, but did include one of the Company’s larger shareholders"
"Votes against issuance of the New Convertible Loan Notes are from a very small number of shareholders"
Assuming that all the larger shareholders voted, I think there is only one possibility which could help get it to 30% of votes.
As for Vulpe's position being untenable, I think that is up to them. I posted a video from 2019 in which they portray themselves as being the guys to make things happen this week. My personal view is that it would benefit their investors to work with Redmile to do exactly that. I'm not quite sure if they are in Sinapore or the Cayman Islands, but I hope they are leveraging their contacts.
Also, there is an AGM resolution allowing the firm to buy back up to 10% of shares . I'm still mulling over some of the resolutions as I don't need to decide until tomorrow and get it into the post. I'll ponder the rest of your post after getting some sleep.
Not delivered so maybe its time we held the bod accountable instead of blaming vulpes.
Ruck 21.58 message. Couldn't agree more better to focus on one or two trials and complete them rather then half completing loads of trials. I have voted and am supporting the bod but it was a close thing. The bod need to do better and need to actually start sticking to their plans, timelines and completing commercial deals. I still have fears that they are great research scientists but terrible business men.
I would normally agree that having all those funds would be a great thing and definitely would have a year ago. But alot has changed in the last year except for commercial deals. From what we know that additional finance wasn't required now as the balance sheet has never looked healthier (before this oo); even without a commercial deal that has clearly been kicked into the long grass it wasn't necessary now. And if a deal is near then even more reason not to raise more now. I am extremely frustrated that the bod have changed their plans again and pushed commercial deals back again. When CH talked of a commercial deal in the next two months the way he was talking discussions must have been advanced otherwise why give such a tight timeline. And if they were advanced he would surely have had an idea of figures and if the figures weren't sufficient then why state a deal within 2 months? So either he had a terrible deal but was pursuing it regardless in which case poor business nouse or he had a good deal that has fallen through again (poor business nouse). I know people will say better data better deals but we've been saying that for 8 years and we have great data (and other biotechs with lesser data have secured good deals). I fear the new enlarged team are becoming too comfortable thinking of scancell as purely a research enterprise when its meant to be a business. But like I say I have supported the bod again on this occasion so hopefully they will come good finally.
Lastly from what I've read I cant see any reason why vulpes will have to sell up, nothing ive read suggests that relationship is irreparably damaged but admittedly everything ive read has been pure speculation? 1st as I asked earlier have we had any confirmation it was vulpes who voted against because they could have converted to have more shares to vote for the motion? 2nd if we believe nxt (or whatever his name is on adfvn) and it was vulpes that voted against it was stated that it was over the terms of the finance not the finance itself so i don't understand why people are saying vulpes wanted to keep price down and dillute further? 3rd i read vulpes have taken up their oo shares which again doesn't seem like the actions of a company thats about to sell up. As mentioned in previous posts I along with everyone else on this forum don't know whats going on and thats part of the problem but I don't think it good to be making vulpes look like the villains when we know so little about whats got on. We know a lot more about what the bod have stated (such as CH) and then not
Once again you twist my words....................."".C7: probably no point discussing further, if you believe an 8% selloff is the result of net demand for shares then we'll never agree. Have a good weekend and stay safe""
I clearly stated as just posted..............."".Exactly my point Knowlesi, 1.3m volume is NOT a high volume, in fact as you know that is afar lower volume than in recent months, but we fall 8.40%!!"""
Where have I mentioned an 8% sell off?? That would be some 60m shares!!!!!
As you say more importantly, have a good weekend and stay safe.