Member Info for AB124

GF123
from RNS 270820,
"....Scancell Holdings plc, (AIM:SCLP), the developer of novel immunotherapies for the treatment of cancer and infectious disease, announces that it has secured funding from Innovate UK, the UK's Innovation Agency, through the 'UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) Ideas to Address COVID-19' funding strand. The funding will be used to initiate a Phase 1 clinical trial ("COVIDITY") during 2021."
Phase 1 clinical study is mentioned.
Don't think it's as you put it to,
"You obviously think the grant is sufficient for Sclp to deliver the vaccine. ."
Absolutely it's not and that was my point.
Hope this helps rebalance your understanding of the Grant.

GF123
I would suggest you have a look at the purpose of the Gov Funding.
Certainly not to "Bankroll" SCLP but for a specific purpose. Wonder what the contractual conditions are for the money? do you know? i would be very interested if you do.

GF
So what was the government grant that we recieved for Covidity about then?
Please don't mix up the question raised by WHO about IP.
I am talking about (say) Covidity being marketed as a profit making item when we have received Government money to develop it?
I can't believe that the BOD would expect to profit from human misery?

GF123
Do you believe that Scancell should be capitalising comercially on their Covid Vaccines?
Do you think that the BOD see it that way?
I can understand the concept of their benefitting in other areas via the reputational benefits, but actually benefitting Commercially (other than recouping their costs) from a Pandemic?
I am surprised.

Apologies, my 8.06 should have read,
"Ratcliffewriter
Do you think that the Vax that are made available through any process at cost [ EDIT] SHOULD have their Patent cover period extended by the time that the IP Owners are making the patented items available on a no profit basis?

Crumbs
I agree, the question is why is this (seemingly) crazy idea of IP release being put forward? I do wonder whether it is more political than altruistic.
Seems to me production, distribution and "Jabbing" are the main concerns.

It seems to me that for the safety of the Planet as a whole it is not a question of why it is difficult to vaccinate the Planet but more of how we do it. I genuinely believe that our own safety is dependent upon a successful Global policy and execution of the project. It will cost a great deal of money, but what is that compared with the bigger picture of global human wellbeing?
The difficult decisions that will be required are only just beginning to be seriously considered.
AIMO.

Ratcliffewriter
Do you think that the Vax that are made available through any process at cost have their Patent cover period extended by the time that the IP Owners are making the patented items available on a no profit basis?

Ratcliffewriter
Sadly it's not just Newsnight who are championing this. WHO are heavily promoting the concept, and the connections there with trading blocs who have a great deal of interest in other people's IP is more than worrying. As mentioned before there has been a great deal more discussion about this in the last year than I realised.
The other issue with the Vax rollouts is that it seems likely that it will be beneficial for all to achieve a sucessful Global programme for the protection of the entire world's population.. The rich industrialised countries cannot expect safety without ensuring (and presumably paying in many cases for the vaccination of the all.
It is (and will continue to be) a very tricky situation with no simple answers.
AIMO

Kashdog
I cannot see the logic in waiving patent rights to the IP.
How that influences the ability to produce and distribute the Vaccines which could (and already is) being simply be covered by licencing is beyond me.
Seems to me the critical point is the devloping countries requirements for the product, which can surely be achieved by ramping up production globally. Who (no pun intended) better to achieve that than partners of the Patent holders under licence?
I hadb't appreciated that this business with the Patent Waiver has been boiling away under the surface for more than a year. Newsnight ran a piece on it tonight as well.
Looks to me that this should it gain traction could be a significant issue as we go forward, but at what level remains to be seen.
FWIW in my view it is not a helpful ingredient to the attempt to roll out the vaccines globally.
AIMO

I can sell 150K+ at 19.725 on my platform on auto so that's pretty good news. :-)

Not too sure the intraday movements are more significant than the level at which the share price settles on the close today.
AIMO

Moonparty
I think people are getting a little nervous about the 21p support giving way and so post ideas.
Not everyone has the iron conviction of the hardcore LTH who have seen the ups and downs of Scancell over the years.
I do not see why those posters should get into trouble for posting what they think is a good idea.
Seems a reasonable idea to generate support for the share price.
AIMO

Since the major near support is 21.4p as Hasiba (I think) said if we don't close above that I'd expect to see some further weakness towards 16.9p the next significant level.
Not rocket science just looking at the levels where we currently rest.
Obviously significant news makes a (hopefully) positive difference.
AIMO

Ratcliffewriter,
But if someone kept on and on about BOD purchases when the SP was shooting upwards wouldn't that draw criticism for making pointless posts?
I imagine the idea of the current call is to show that the BOD are confident for the future.
Anyway, just my view.

Surely one would expect to see calls for the BOD to buy shares when the Share Price is falling rather than when it is going up? Seems a reasonable idea to me.

LochinvarLass
Not certain i'd agree with your suggestion that they've given up this year simply because there's an order in for Boosters.
Not only do deals take time but structured ongoing plans for protection from Pandemics do too!
AIMO

Cumbs
Thanks for posting.
We are where we are at this point in time, but I'm not so sure without the backup of a concerted and completely focussed push that we'll be so happily complacent for too long.
It is only in the last couple of days that the enormity of the Global situation has registered with me, and whilst I was - until the end of last week - happy to bask in the glory of the UK Vaccination programme's success unless we do push the Global effort we are living in a fool's paradise.
No matter how many Vax there are in development we should ensure that what is in production and can be distributed NOW is pushed to the limit.
Money IMO is irrelevant now and any shareholders who expect to make a fortune directly from this emergency should look inwards.
This is about forgoing financial rewards now for the greater good, and for letting the platforms other than Covidity etc. speak for themselves in due course.
I would very much like to know what the BOD's collective view of the likely financial return for Shareholders could/would/should be should either of the therapies we have awaiting trial become avialable for production, distribution and ultimately jabs in arms.
The contracts signed for Covidity (et al?) would be interesting as we really as shareholders probably shouldn't expect too much from them. As I believe has been mentioned before the knock on effect of the principles of therapies are presumably ro be the drivers of Scancell going forward (apart from the requirement of successful Trials) to prove them up.
AIMO

Chelsea11
I didn't miss your point. Yes, today this lunchtime we are relatively safe.
The point I was trying to make was that unless there are massive changes in the way the World looks at the pandemic and how those less fortunate than the "Beefeaters" are faring then with the opportunity for the Virus to mutate multiple times in the parts of the world which are out of control (and the full horror of a TRULY out of control are is yet to be seen - India is just an indicator ATM). Given that vaccination of the population of the Planet will take years at current pace, I think it would be dangerous to think we are safe.
IMO we are definitley not.
The principal reason?
Where the worst mutations are likely to appear are the very places where vaccines are absent or almost absent and those aresa are the ones that will ultimately determine the future for the comfortable "Beefeaters".
Forget the new developments we need the World to be Vaccinated NOW and on an FOC basis if necessary.
So FWIW I believe that the way to stay safest is for a Global Vaccination programme (of substance) now. And with that comment I understand that I'm shouting about it six months later than would have been sensible.
Development of improved vaccines should continue in tandem and apace and they shoiuld be budgeted for Global production and distribution from the start of approval.
Complacency and Covid do not make good bedfellows for the future.
This is going to be so expensive, and the "Beefeaters" should expect to fund the greater proportion of the Global financial costs.
The cost of failure in this will be much more than financial.
AIMO

I wonder will it one day be considered that Vaccination is a human right?
I wonder how many of the current Deniers will be in the queue demonstrating for their "Rights" should the Virus become less amenable to being controlled as a result of being unchecked for lack of vaccines elsewhere in the World?