Proposed Directors of Tirupati Graphite explain why they have requisitioned an GM. Watch the video 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.
Like you AB124 I worry that something isn’t quite as it should be. A company with huge potential, world beating science etc yet trading at circa 13p!! I accept we need positive data from one of the trials, but 13p……it simply doesn’t make sense to me…..but what do I know? Patience will hopefully be rewarded.
Med companies, high risk but possible high return. Everything depends on when you jump in the water..
I think this share is actually being de-risked as each day goes by, SCIB we know works historically and is now improved, there is no bad news from South Africa, Modi is in the clinic too, Covidity may have missed the peak opportunity but equally may validate Avidimab, and we know there have been offers for Mabs turned down, something a Board desperate for cash would not have done.
We have been waiting for ages to really break out but the science keeps building and the value will follow.
Do I regret not having more commercial nous on the board? In the past, yes. Do we currently have enough with Vulpes and Redmile? Probably, they didn't invest here to get pennies back! The Board know what the science is worth, we can only guess but we can all agree its much more than the current SP suggests. Would I be surprised to see a platform or two sold off? No, but I cannot begin to imagine the value if Moditope works... Its a gamble, shares always are, but I think , finally, we are on the runway, engines are running and we are now just 1 RNS from brakes off, power on. takeoff.
Thanks Dalester - agree with you.
Large pile of dung through, according to some!
Dalestar, good post and this is my point, we have had three dood RNSs in a couple of weeks which seems to have set off doubts about financing and remending LD of our need to finalise commercial deals as trials begin with haste.
I am sure LD would appreciate those reminders, she must have forgotted the need to commercialise, lol, Talk about big diversions from good steady news!!!!
I'm not sure anyone's saying that deals should be made with haste (I think that's what was meant).
I do believe though that the company might helpfully indicate its vision for commercial progress on a short, medium and long term view so that the Shareholders can make considered judgements on how they view the future.
I don't believe anybody's reminding the CEO about the question, I think it's a reasonable expectation that shareholders should be given some idea about where the BoD think they can progress the IP.
Since there's Trials underway, and also that by the AGM there should be some idea of progress surely it's not an unreasonable question to ask (particularly as the capital we have is finite whereas the development of the science is potentially expandable).
So, can a shareholder ask for information which would allow him/her to decide whether the anticipated direction of the company - crudely long term income producer or short term asset sale or a mixture of the two?
As stated before Scancell's mission statement in 2011 was necessarily abandoned in 2012 so with trials on the go now maybe it wouldn't be unreasonable to ask, "where do we go from here?".
Short(ish) term asset sales or long term development of the existing assets?
In other words what does the BoD think is the best way forward? There's been very little indication that I've seen.
Obviously there's several options but the preferred ones should be broadly available for consideration. Doesn't seem too complicated to me.
AIMO
Lindy did say for the Covidity trial that, once the trial is finished, they would publish the results (from memory I think she said 6 weeks after trial termination) and only then would they consider deals.
It seemed a quite definite timescale to me.
I expect the other trials will follow a similar pattern, although Moditope may be different if it acts as quickly as it did with mice. The tumours have disappeared so we are not waiting for any extra data :-)
RP,
I wonder what sort of deal she meant. I don't remember it being qualified. Moditope is a case in point. I doubt there's anyone holding shares here who doesn't expect positive early data, but is the intention to get a deal to sell the platform or retain some sort of interest? As I'm sure you'll remember I have stated that I don't expect any response on the Bob's future intentions for the company before the AGM or when early data is to hand (whichever is the sooner). If I've missed something regarding the nature of any Deals (short/medium or long term) I'm sorry but I don't think I have.
All I'm looking for is an indication of the BoD's thinking in terms of the company's likely lifespan through the way it continues to retain interests in any of the IP it owns at the moment or might expand in the future.
AIMO
AB
She did hint that a deal would involve immunobody rather than just Covidity. This gets me thinking in terms of Covidity possibly being effective against all Coronaviruses and perhaps a big future for immunobody against other infections. This fits in well with CEPI stating that they are interested in vaccine platforms. It also fits with the peer review of the SCIB1 trial that mentioned that immunobody could be effective against infectious diseases. It all depends on the quality of the data of course. All IMHO
RP
OK, so that presumably gives rise to thoughts of possible future work fo Scancell or a lock stock and barrel sale of the platform. Or perhaps a complete sale with Scancell researching other areas?
This is what I'm talking about. Does Scancell have a long term future irrespective of any (as yet) indeterminate deals. It's as much a question of the types of deal and the CSO'S intentions longer term.
The initial impetus is obviously platform related, but there's plenty of possibilities which we shareholders cannot yet know about.
I'd like to find out what the thinking really is.... anyone can speculate but ultimately that's all it is I would hope the BoD have some idea of where they want the company to go.
Seems a reasonable question for an investor to ask.
AIMO
But they have already made the mistake of incorrectly stating the future course of the company during the SCIB1 trial. They are hardly going to repeat the same mistake.
RP
Well, we don't agree. I say the Shareholders are entitled to know where the BoD want to take the company, whereas you seemingly don't.
I think it would be helpful to everyone, but as we don't agree there's not much more to be said.
Appreciate your considered responses though. Thanks.
AIMO.
Far more considered than insulting shareholders by telling them they are being kept in the dark and being fed ****!
AB - I get your point about where the BoD are going - its nice to know from an investors point of view but think of this as a poker game - you've just flopped a royal Flush - you know you can't lose (lets say LD has a pretty good idea that the trials are going to be successful) - what do you do? Do you go all in (publicise your strategy), in which case the remaining players may just fold and you win very little or do you wait and see what others do ahead of you? Your aim is to extract the maximum amount of money from those around the table. You keep your options open - you've a pretty good idea how the other players play, so you keep your cards close to your chest. That is exactly what LD will be doing - she knows the market and I'm sure she/the BoD will be in regular discussions with Biotechs etc. and they will have a pretty good idea of what is needed and will make a judgement accordingly.
Lets face it, private investors will never get close to what strategy the BoD are pursuing but you can bet your bottom dollar that Vulpes/Redmile WILL be and may well be providing input into what direction to take.
FWIW I'm not worried at all - I know there have been false dawns before but I think, for anyone still following the (cr@p I know) poker analogy, the river card will soon be shown and the pot will be there for the taking.
All IMHO, DYOR , GL etc etc etc
Stakis,
I respect your views and yes, maybe a poker game has some value as an analogy.
I have as much inside information as you so we're level there.
Do you have any specific knowledge of the financial specifics of Biotech?
I don't, BUT I have massive respect fir LD as a CSO.
I'm equally not so sure that there aren't skilsets that are specific to a CEO in this sector.
Maybe LD has these skills, but even if she has does she have the time to demonstrate those skills? I'd always assumed that CEO was a full time job with specific experience and contact requirements, particularly when attempting to market multi platforms currently in trials.
So we're looking at an inexperienced CEO helping a potentially multimillion company who's also CSO of that company whilst also holding down a position at a uk university. To help out on the finance side a retired Board member has been drafted back on a temporary(?) basis.
So I guess that if LD turns up to each "poker game" to face professional multinational negotiators, lawyers and associated staffers she'll not only have sorted out the Science but she'll out wit them in the negotiations/pokergame for the value of the company.
Wonderwoman indeed!
As I say I have no experience of running
the negotiations for a potentially multiibillion company. I do believe in horses for courses and I sincerely hope that our overworked CSO is as good a poker player as you say. Having written this post I'm less happy than I was.
I don't believe that selling Scancell is really about a game of poker even though our representative is unbeatable on the science.
Stakis it's been good to have your views and be able to respond. I don't dismiss your points but I do wonder how far away from the actuality of selling a Bio to the very sharp and astute Global Pharma both of us are.
I do hope we shareholders do hear about the future of Scancell from the BoD in due course.. I think it would be interesting and helpful of not necessary.
Thanks again.
AIMO
I do love a bit of nostalgia, but the 'they're running out of money' and 'RG/LD/some other member of the BoD is inept/out of their depth/bound to be struggling' are old chestnuts and wearing a bit thin. I doubt Redmile would stake millions of pounds of money under their management if they had the misgivings that some here claim to have identified, and it's reasonable to assume that Redmile know a little more about the team running the company than a few miserable keyboard warrior traders.
RW
Perhaps you could let us know where you see Scancell in five years time?
I have no idea which is why it would be helpful for the company to give some information as to their vision after the early indicators from the current trials.
Look forward to hearing.
AB "So we're looking at an inexperienced CEO helping a potentially multimillion company who's also CSO of that company whilst also holding down a position at a uk university"
LD's primary expertise is in the science and she may be the CEO but I don't imagine she will be sat around a table with Biotech companies on her own! She will have a team around her all experts in their field who will advise her and of course the BoD, there will be professional advisers too.
As you say - horses for courses. Keep the faith and this is not just blind optimism.
I too have had reservations in the past about LD performing three roles (CEO, CSO and Uni).
But turn it on its head, instead of thinking can a scientist do the job of CEO maybe at a biotech company the role of CEO can ONLY be done by a scientist.
A case in point is Ugur Sahin of BioNTech, you know the billionaire CEO of the multi billion dollar company.
I'm sure LD has a very competent team around her. But given her performance in presentations, interviews and at AGMs, she is more than capable of handling any situation herself. Don't forget, a major part of the negotiations will focus on the science and the interpretation of scientific data. There is no one better than LD for this.
That's my opinion anyway. I do wonder why some are so reluctant to discuss valid topics. It is right and proper to discuss funding, the performance of the bod, the performance of individuals and anything else relevant to an investment in biotech. Trying to suppress debate is counter productive. New investors are far more likely to be attracted by open discussion and a positive conclusion.
Stakis,
Firstly (damned predictive text) the word "helping" in the passage you quoted should have read "helming". Minor difference but.. .
Thanks for coming back on that.
My point is not how many advisors etc but a balance between the Scientific and Financial at the top of Scancell.
It is a valid and reasonable concern in that irrespective of any negotiating "team" I believe there is too much reliance on one person's judgement which sadly does lack a lifetime's involvement in the financial hotseat of companies at the sharp end of companies in a very cutthroat business. There is no question as to our CEO's Scientific expertise.
It's that balance which is missing from Scancell. The two people at the top of the company are the same as existed in 2012.
I'm not sure that that is necessarily a good thing.
I hope to see an update from the company when we have dome data indicating their vision for Scancell's future.
Simple as that.
I don't think that's in any way unreasonable.
AIMO
RR,
I agree to a point, but why not have a CSO and another differently experienced individual as CEO?
AIMO
The only thing I can predict with utter confidence is that any prediction I make for the future of Scancell will be twisted and 'reformulated' by you AB, and as you say, who knows? Maybe just reread the RNSs, look at the products v the market, and contemplate what you can see, what you can't see, and what you can reasonably expect to develop.
Thanks to all for your input on this thread.
i think we can say its been done to death so I'll leave it here.
Again, thanks for your thoughts.
ATB
ratty,
"Maybe just reread the RNSs, look at the products v the market, and contemplate what you can see, what you can't see, and what you can reasonably expect to develop."
That's good advice. Why don't you try it yourself?
You guys are amazing! Knowlesi knew all my trades and how many shares I own, and you know what I have and haven't read. I stand in awe..