Member Info for AB124

So if it's unexpected why even major on the fact that there's been a 90% reduction in one patient? Statistically it's irrelevant and so discussing the finer points of tumour measurement (without any professional input) is pointless if not misleading.
Once everyone starts thinking in terms of such massive reductions anything less is disappointing, and so we go on....
The SP is flat. perhaps it would be better to discuss (honestly) why that is and focus on things that some here might actually have some relevant input to make. I'm not sure anyone posting here (with Very, Very few exceptions) has the knowledge and training to discuss with any degree of authority the analysis of Tumour size/volume reduction.
AIMO

So what we're saying here is that the Tumour has shrunk by 90%?
That seems like a massive amount. how many others on the trial have seen similar reductions?
What if the others are only 50% reductions (or less)?
Are we getting a bit in front of the curve here or are we simply generating expectations that are unlikely to be matched?
Wouldn't it be great if Scancell announced what the trial has actually revealed? But now we'll all be disappointed if not all patients show such massive reductions.
Shame we simply can't wait for what's actually happening rather than raising expectations so high?
AIMO

Hasiba,
It looks encouraging so let's hope your assessment is correct.
I'm still hopeful.
AIMO

Well it's offered over at 15.8 in good size ATM.
Short term support at 15.9 so today's close will be interesting.
AIMO

I should have included the comment that I think it's good that people are beginning to consider that Scancell's success might take a little longer than many have imagined.
AIMO

Can't see why not, it seems to be achievable. The question is whether agreement can be achieved between the holders and Scancell.
So a possibility if each side can see benefits.
I haven't read anything that precludes such action (but I haven't looked post the first extension).

EE
Apologies re Patent grant re Moditope, The original announcement did refer to the early grant in the process. The wider Patent applications followed.
I would say that it would be madness to announce any pure and unready idea in the Company's R&D programme, but once the concept is in play then there must be notification. That is pure commonsense.
The Rules are there to be challenged, but holding back hard information particularly on Bids etc (Once agreed with the suitor) is way out of court.
So apologies for my earlier error.
AIMO

Two of the late trades last night were effectively Off Exchange and the third 8K was an uncrossing trade. The open this morning is not a surprise.

EE
The rules exist to be applied in all circumstances and failure to apply them leaves any transgressor liable to legal challenge. Suggesting that Companies can ignore the bits they want to whenever they like is a recipe for disaster. Scancell applied the rule to the letter with the announcement of the discovery of (your innacurately recollected example) Moditope. Their announcement was RNSd PRIOR to the grant of patents.
I will therefore continue to believe that they will continue as before applying the rule scrupulously. To suggest otherwise seems disingenuous and is demonstrably historically inaccurate.
AIMO

AIM rules for Companies 2021.

I ,EE I disagree with your view that,

"Just on a point of fact, there is absolutely no such duty on any company’s directors.

They can keep things non-public for as long as they like, subject to giving accurate statements in annual reports etc. Indeed Scancell kept the original discovery of Moditope secret, whilst they obtained patents."

Actually Modi was not patented when they announced the discovery, but more to the point from AIM rules,

"General disclosure of price sensitive information
11. An AIM company must issue notification without delay of any new developments which
are not public knowledge which, if made public, would be likely to lead to a significant
movement in the price of its AIM securities. By way of example, this may include matters
concerning a change in:
— its financial condition;
— its sphere of activity;
— the performance of its business; or
— its expectation of its performance."

Seems to disagree with your idea EE.
https://docs.londonstockexchange.com/sites/default/files/documents/AIM%20Rules%20for%20Companies%20%2801012021%29_1.pdf
AIMO

WW
You make the point much better than I did for separating the Scientific side of Scancell and the Commercial.
As you appear to suggest there needs to be a division between the two sides after the rapid progress of the company over the last few years. I would have expected planning for this expansion, which CH's recruitment demonstrated.
I'll say again with the significant advance of the company it seems to me that losing the CEO and then simply returning to one of the two deputies from before at a time of massive expansion of both sides of the business was not the best Corporate move.
Thanks for crystallising the position for me.
AIMO.

Crumbs, Sorry CH Cliff Holloway!
(Matt Han****? - who's he)LOL

Crumbs,
Re Vulpes and RM, the CEO around that time (MH) has departed (I wonder why) and LD is back in that CEO place (I also wonder why).

Matt, you make a great case for perhaps reconsidering the bizarre continuance of a joint CEO and CSO where the Commercialisation is a full time job as is the R&D.
Wonder if If you agree. I've been there for a few years now.
AIMO

I really don't think we need anything from Scancell other than RNSs that show the realisation of the expectations from the platforms (particularly Moditope et sec).
Actions (or demonstrably and statistically sufficiently populated proof) that the claims are turning into reality will do the trick. If the last RNS supported the massive claims made in places for the trial we wouldn't be where we are SP wise today. As it is the claims (or hopeful scenarios weren't available so now the market looks realising that it'll have to wait. As waiting becomes an issue which is accepted the question of financing will undoubtedly come more to the fore (We're fine until Q1 2024 no longer seems so far away) and so as people find their profits evaporating they get nervous.
That to me is what's happened . A really,really good RNS will make the difference. Maybe a well presented and set out presentation to Investors will help, but it won't cure it.
I think we'll have to wait and hope that the data we need is quicker than we fear. Otherwise we we might have a bit of a Longer list of LTHs than we have already.
AIMO (and I could well be wrong, BUT my guess is as good as anyone's ATM

Matt,
Yes, fair enough.... Let's hope that things get sorted out sooner rather than later.
ATB

Matt,
Can you honestly say that you're not disappointed with the fact that every patient in the trial hasn't seen the same result as the patient who did?
Don't forget there's a lot of very heavily invested shareholders here who did expect that and due to the massive holdings they have I'm sure they'll be thinking whether the immediate future's as bright as it seemed to be in November last year.
I'd be very disappointed if I was "all in" and the initial results didn't match my expectations. It's just human nature isn't it? Not all the BOD's fault surely?
AIMO

Matt,
Sadly being down this morning is not surprising.
Anyone who bought in on the excitement of getting Data on Modi (after the news of one patient's response to the trial dosage) isn't going to be overwhelmed by the RNS yesterday.
Unfortunately the adage buy the rumour, sell the fact hasn't worked this time thus far because the fact was in advance of the rumour and the RNS hasn't borne it out
There's still plenty of time for the SP to improve, but first (as we're seeing at the moment) disappointment has to be digested and many either disappointed or overexposed will vent their feelings with the order button. They'll be back at some point.
AIMO

Matt
Yes.
If you believe that the SP would have maintained the levels it has since 2021 without RM and Vulpes you would be wrong.
Why?
Because those two outfits gave us the wherewithal to get the trials underway.
What price SCLP without that backing?
3/4/5p?
If you were lucky. We'd have no cash and been sold off for pennies.
So,
Yes I am serious.
AIMO

I think there has been a concerted effort to "maintain" the SP for some time now.
A true penny stock would have seen much more volatility the Scancell has over the last couple of years. We have some big backers on board.
If we had a cashflow of regularity and significance we would not be at these levels. We haven't so we have to wait for the fruits of the Trial Data to be announced.
There will be a need to either enhance the likelihood of revenue flows with that Data. If it doesn't produce that Commercialisation we will truly be a penny stock.
So have to wait for the promise that the platforms hold.
It doesn't help that it's taken eleven years for Moditope to have been converted from Lab to trial, BUT it is now so lets all hope we were right to buy Scancell.
I still believe we were.
The theory is we were, but it just needs the proof.
AIMO