Member Info for AB124

Well, if nothing else the earlier statement that the SP's going up this morning isn't borne out by the quotes in the Market.

EE I was simply asking Allan whether he thought that The shelving of covidity was good news. Given the people here who were saying that Covidity would save the planet and become the go to defence against Pandemics present and future were clearly not on the same page as Scancell.
So Allan says,
"In my view , what cracker of an update , all platforms looking very good indeed "
Not sure Scancell's RNS supports that.

So why are we not taking Covidity forward?

Allan, do you include Covidity in your assessment of , "all platforms looking very good indeed"?

I think the problem is that many posters here felt (and posted over the last few weeks) that it wouldn't be a dull RNS.

dstanley (stan) last posted 23rd Feb 2021.
New Stan started 19th Oct 2021.
I'm sure there's a good reason.
So, good to hear Stan.

Wild ,
Ok thanks .

Wild,
interesting point. How much time would it require to get ETS data in front of the regulator as an SE for the current trial(s) compared with the normal process. How long would we have to wait before this could be announced by RNS? It is a good point if there's a significantly shorter timescale.
Would it mean we could know in months?

Wild,
You too.

Wild,
So it seems to me from your 12.50 that the Company doesn't have to report on individual results because they're statistically insignificant, and indeed doing so could be seriously misleading. I believe that the revelation in the current trial that one patient had responded well to early dose was more having to acknowledge that information had been unofficially placed in the public domain. I'm not certain that they would have been required (or even wanted to) make that point but possibly more their hand was forced.
As they didn't have to release that detail it's hardly keeping back good news, it seems to me to be eminently sensible not to make incredibly early information available too early.
I can't imagine that we'll be hearing any new information in that context in the very near future.
When Scancell are satisfied that they have good and verified news to release they will do so. Until then they probably don't want to make noise that is (sadly) statistically insignificant until more data is to hand.
Let's face it there's nothing worse than having loads of RNS which can't be supported by significant hard data. That sort of approach is only of use to traders rather than investors and certainly doesn't add to the Company's credibility.
So as far as I can see Scancell hasn't been guilty in any case over the last ten years of keeping good news under wraps. They seem to be particularly careful to RNS when they are required to.
AIMO

Wildforce
The theoretical trial where Chester stated,
"Even trial results can be held back under those circumstances."
in his 12.12

Wildforce,
I was referring to the completion of trial (ie as I stated,
"if the trial is completed and results assessed and completed I'm not sure it would be possible to hold those back. The trial runner would presumably be requird to release those."

Apols,
Line 7 (my 12.32) Should read,
"The bid price for the shares could be seriously adversely affected (from the shareholders' POV)."

Chester,
Ref your 12.12
Since you are talking about what information can be held back under potential Bid situations, and Roses' original point was that "Good news" can be held back, what benefit would a Company with outstanding Trial results keep that information back?
I can see the only potential beneficiary of that being the bidding company who would surely be very happy for the company being bid for holding back good Trial news. The bid price for the shares could be seriously adversely (from the shareholders POV).
Not sure the Bidee comapany's shareholders being in any way happy about their company accepting a Bid when the entire market did not have the available information. In fact, The London Stock Exchange might enforce their rules (designed to protect shareholders).
AIMO

Chester,
If you are still negotiating the deal it's not a deal until concluded.
Results at the completion of a trial MUST be released. Individual results are not required to be released.
Your suggestion that trial results can be held back, if the trial is completed and results assessed and completed I'm not sure it would be possible to hold those back. The trial runner would presumably be rquired to release those. How could trial results not be considered price sensitive under those circumstances?

Reporting of price sensitive information. AIM Rule 11 requires notification without delay of any new developments which are not public knowledge which, if made public, would cause a significant movement in its share price.

How can Price sensitive (Good) News be kept quiet whilst price sensitive Bad News must be declared?
Not sure about that analysis.
AIMO

Chelsea 11
So actually not overly pessimistic then. I was worried I'd missed something significant.
Thanks for the reply.

Chelsea 11
So what are the most pessimistic suggestions?
I thought pretty well everyone here is optimistic here (in terms of Data expectations).
AIMO

"Perhaps we need to moderate some of the most optimistic expectations, though I hope not."
Good advice.
Always better to be pleasantly surprised than bitterly disappointed I always say!
AIMO