Member Info for AB124

Crumbs
What do I expect?
Nothing.
What do I hope for?
The best results that the IP can produce.
We know it all works in the lab. Now we have trials.
Nobody, but nobody can predict what the trial results will be.
I would like Scancell to produce the best results possible, hopefully better than all that has gone before.
BUT
I don't know what those results will be.
As a result i sit and wait and literally hope for the best.
I hold shares in Scancell so I want the best results possible, but simply by being invested I show my support (and hope) for the future.
Because of my stance I was not underwhelmed by any results or outcomes so far.
BUT
I don't sit waiting for unlikely results. If we get them great. If not OK, I tried an investment.
Do I understand the science?
No, not really but it sounds good.
Do i think the BOD are the best in the world?
No, not really.
Do i think the science is the best ever?
I don't know but I HOPE so.
Not sure too many people here really claim to know.
We can all hope, but I don't believe anybody KNOWS.
There, hope that helps.
It's a high risk investment that I HOPE pays off.
Not many of the experts round here have got it right so far.
AIMO

Moon,
I was simply originally responding to Rob and his asking who would be underwhelmed.
As I'm sure you'll agree there will be many more quotes we can find, but you did start the ball rolling by writing,
"Come on AB, nobody proclaimed that".
Ok I agree with you looking forward is the way to do it, but realistic looking forward and overhyped looking forward are different things altogether, hence my comments answering the question who would be underwhelmed.
All that said let's HOPE that Scancell's results all we dream of but Please let's keep the expectations realistic (otherwise i'll really start digging for evidence). LOL
AIMO

Moonparty
try this for a quote.

"...Going to be interesting with the continuing moditope knowledge and the looking into possible causes of failure... a very important very scientific process ,how and exactly when modi1 trial appears... will it not just be a combo trial due to needing to use patients on current approved treatments but will it also involve other combos that limit it chances of failure and indeed get it to that 100% survival in humanised mouse model potential......."

It took about 3 minutes to find that one, and if we move to ADVFN it would probably reveal much greater claims (inc the melting away of all tumours).
However you look at it there's not much room for doubt in what will happen once Modi gets into the clinic is there? Perhaps a rather less exuberant approach to claims for the trial would allow excitement that there is evidence of positive results in more than 50% of cases would be a better approach, with less room for disappointment?
AIMO

Rob,
I suspect anyone who has found the data underwhelming would be those who believed that all cancer would be melted away by the vaccine.
There are many who proclaimed that this would be the case and as a result I imagine there would be many who would be seeing that prophesy as being the benchmark, which many here advised caution against believing.
Hence anything less than 100% not only cure but disappearance of tumors would probably be underwhelming for those who believed the rather more excitable claims.
The management of expectation is best understated hope rather than triumphant assurance.
AIMO

Konar,
From my perspective it's not " only a poster presentation" it's more to do with the point that people have been discussing (and implying) what information will be presented when as others have stated,
1 it's not an investor sales event
2 the information (as explained by Bermudashorts below ) the abstracts had to be submitted months ago.
My point is simply that people were posting here authoritatively when they patently didn't understand what the event actually was.
So we now know the information is being put into a space which is potentially highly beneficial and indicates that there is interest in Scancell's technogolgy, but initially (even now) from a scientific viewpoint.
Let's hope something significant does come from it but for heaven's sake let's also not overdo the timescale.
Perhaps helping the more excitable posters to settle down for a wait would be a good way forward.
The old adage, a watched pot never boils might be worth keeping in mind.
From what I've been learning in the last few years the path of a bio from product discovery to commercialisation can be very long indeed.
So to misquote Mr Micawber,
Impatient declarations of massive news tomorrow, result; misery.
(SP falls after excitement generated by misunderstandings fails to materialise).
Patient awaiting of news coming sometime, result; (hopefully) happiness.
(Company announces a beneficial cashflow out of the blue).
AIMO

It's interesting that RG has left Scancell but taken up a challenge elsewhere.
Obviously he would want to take time out for a well earned retirement, but why leave the company he's been involved with for 23 years? I wonder whether Scancell is seen by those (who know) as a longer term investment rather than something that's going to stratospheric levels in the next few months?
It might also go some way to explain MD's apparent frustration with the Commercial path for a company with the (as yet) significantly unrealised IP value potential such as Scancell has. It also makes me question just how well envisioned and planned the future direction towards monetisation for the various components is formed. Obviously there's a need to structure a clear set of intentions as to which areas to prioritise and those which shouldn't be drawing interest/funding away from the "Main runners".
Not an easy brief for any one CEO let alone one who is also the CSO.
There must be many stresses and pulls against each area of both operations, development and commercial progress (now a very significant priority).
Interesting times..... Perhaps the next RNS will provide all the answers?
AIMO

Everything I ever "knew" about Poster presentations at Pharma world Conferences was taken from "Trusted Posters" on this forum. I never felt the need to check on the sage comments about LD holding the floor and people queuing up after the presentation to ask the knowing questions as deals were put together on the hoof.
Because of information I tripped over from elsewhere (well before it was mentioned on this BB) my eyes were opened last week.
Interesting how so many knowledgeable posters here seemed to have been posting about something that was completely different from the reality of a real world Poster Presentation.
I hope this subject is the only one that incorrect information has been put out on this BB as "Gospel" over the years

I've been watching the comments on the BB over the last few days and it seems to me that the information provided by Scancell's poster presentation was (publically) very much as explained by Bermuda Shorts what seems like a very long time ago now. From memory it was something along the lines of don't expect any new information because the submissions had to be in ages ago.
Seems to me that he had it absolutely bang on. Having read his ideas about Scancell's presentation being unlikely to produce any new news I was not surprised in the lack of SP excitement generated. Seems we have to continue the patient waiting game.
Hopefully no news is good news.
AIMO

I suspect the due diligence mentioned earlier focussed on the science. Vulpes seem not to be concerned about that as expected, but perhaps more about the route to commercialisation of said IP.
Rather a mixed message in my view.
AIMO

EE
Sorry to have hit a nerve.
Most traders I know would simply tell me to eff off and then we'd have a beer.
Apologies for wrinkling your smooth exterior.
Filtering is probably best!
AIMO

EE
Your comment,
"When I used to sit in City trading rooms, there were plenty of people who used charts. Indeed, I did myself when trading things like government bonds and FX.",
Your experience is patently is far superior to anything that can be countered by a numpty like me.
Sorry for having started a discussion you clearly don't want to acknowledge as having any relevance whatsoever.
I'm sure your professional trading performance was exemplary.
Surprised that an FX trader is psychologically able to BUY and keep buying and holding Shares such as Scancell without using any of the obvious signals that the SP has displayed over the last two or three years.
Your natural trading makeup is so far away from the strategy you've employed for Scancell that deep inside there must be a voice goading you for having built such a significant holding of Scancell yet never having crystallised any profit with the SP being only a little over 50% of the recent highs.
Let's be honest, playing with your own money is very different from the Company's. In my experience any trader with a 100% (or greater) profit would be unlikely to leave it running without taking some "insurance" to protect his capital.
Maybe I'm talking here about a disciplined trader, and maybe you are a cavalier who throws caution to the wind!
All very Gung Ho, but not a very good example to any youngsters in the Dealing Room hoping to secure a Trader's job. But then, I guess you are now retired.
I'd better make sure I make the point here,
AIMO

EE,
If you say so but your,
"I view the share price as two steps forward and one step back - but one never know the size or location of the steps."
That's the entire point of TA. Taking history and projecting forward.
Patterns.
Very much along the lines of the one you identified,
" two steps forward and one step back "
Sometimes history DOES repeat itself...
I'm not a particularly convinced disciple of TA but it's always worth keeping in mind the near term supports and resistance levels as an additional tool in the Investors Toolkit.
I originally made the point because you'd mentioned your observed pattern. That's what TA's about.
I'm not saying it works all the time (of course it doesn't) but you were treading very close to the periphery of the ideas behind chartism.
So don't think I'm calling you a Chartist, I'm not.
AIMO

EE
Your last sentence very much makes the case for those who follow TA.

I think the problem is that particularly at a pivotal stage such as we're fast approaching , the posting and reposting of old articles is seen by some as displaying an element of desperation whilst others might gain comfort from history when there's nothing new to feast on. My usual view tends toward the former but given the likelihood of news approaching which will validate (or not) much of Scancell's IP I can understand the reasons for "reminding" readers of the history.
So I guess until the Scancell cards are revealed there's likely to be an element of historical repeats.
Maybe no bad thing for some but perhaps considered a waste of time and effort for the more stoic amongst us.
Even I think that there's no right or wrong in this situation.
AIMO.

Thought we were clear until Q1 24... That's not a year is it?
That's where the need for commercialisation of something from the IP starts to matter.
As I posted a few days ago the Banking situation ATM isn't conducive to drop of a hat funding requirements.
AIMO
AIMO

Whatever the situation re recruiting, Scancell are heading towards a need for commercialisation of something simply because due to the recent eruptions in financial markets the funding of Scancell's future will be drawn into ever sharper focus in the coming months. Without some cash generation from existing platforms the required finance isn't going to come cheap.
AIMO

WTP you stated,

"If you just want to go RNS's then fine. But if others, like myself, want to look at this info that's up to them too"

That's fine as long as the points are made that any conclusions drawn are made by people not qualified to draw such conclusions and non qualified posters should make that point.
RNS conclusions are drawn by Scancell and the trial runners.
There's a massive difference between the two as we've seen over many years and from many posters on BBs such as this.
It seems to me that the RNS announcements have been almost exclusively more accurate than lay conclusions from BB posters bandied around as "Facts".
That statement does not require an "AIMO" footer, it's a fact.

RR
Speculation (as I understand it) is based on the anticipated risk/reward sought by the investor in share price terms.
Not, (as far as I'm concerned) on the amateur medical interpretations of an individual Patient's scan results obtained from a source which (again in my view) should have it's privacy respected whatever the purely legal position of it being posted on a support BB for Cancer victims. It's not about legality for me in this case, it's about common decency.
That said, Partial Response seems to very adequately sum up the position in the case being discussed here.
As to the ins and outs of percentiles that's a completely different issue and nothing to do with the Trial debate as the medical profession have worked out their ways of measuring and interpreting the tumour size/mass changes which I'm sure they'll share with us when available.
Thanks for coming back on this.
Good job I didn't go to bed then! :-)
Thanks for your comments.
As an aside, I wonder how many investors here have actually benefitted financially to date from being aware of the scan results from one patient? Unless they've been trading probably very few. Seems to me the SP might (Just) be a couple of pence higher than when the info was first poached so in the overall scheme of things the Market has attached very little import to the results of one patient. The patient and friends and family have surely been well rewarded. Food for thought? It was for me.

RP,
I like that ! :-)

RR so basically you're saying that the 90% quoted is an irrelevance?
I'd agree and so for me the discussion is misleading and uninformed.
At least that's the way I see it.
I've had my say, so thanks for the opportunity to make my point.
AIMO