Member Info for AB124

Spre
I'd like to think so, but the question is whether there's sufficient indication of things happening to provide a boost. plus there's always the ability of interested parties to adjust the share price in any direction, so maybe we have to hope for the right indications to come forth from the Boardroom today. I think to move things in any meaningful way there'll have to be the sort of news that isn't simply a range of well meaning promises.
Whatever (if anything) is passed on its not long to wait.

I see that the share price on the day of last years AGM opened and closed at 7.35p
Hopefully this years meeting will be better share price wise.
It should be should it not?

Kashdog
The level of Reccomendations is about the only way to establish whether a post has any level of support, and so 14 seems pretty conclusive to me.

I've started a new thread for this because the one you "Crashed" will be taken down by admin if you try to pursue this discussion.
I will reply to you simply to say that i have no interest in the subject you raise.
I think you should address your disruptive post to whoever might respond, I will not.
I will ask though whether you, as one of the self declared largest Personal Investors in Scancell (5.7m shares according to your own posts), should be seen to be attempting to slur other posters on a public forum. I would have thought that that certainly doesn't dignify you or the forum upon which you attempt publish these things.
Hope you don't mind me making my own views on this matter known. I think it's beneath anyone's dignity to pursue the matter further.

Kashdog
I think you've hit the nail on the head re the earlier progress of Scancell.
The grinding to a halt of a meaningful forward momentum of trials (for a a number or reasons, some at the door of the BoD some not) has been a drag on the SP and has allowed the impetus of the Science dynamic to have left the Finance area way behind.
It seems to me that the Gold plated capital injection here in the last few months now needs to be matched by a gold plated move to obtain the Data which will validate (hopefully) the as yet untapped value of the various platforms.
Scancell have been granted what they've always needed. Capital and plenty of it. I believe that capital needs to rapidly be turned into valuable data. Then and only then can the Science be validated, and that then turns the Compnay and Share price into what we all hhope it to be.
So yes, there's no excuses any more.

LL
I like your comment regarding online personalities. Well said!
I am so sorry, you mentioned something about charts and playing with Fibonacci numbers the other day. Thanks for asking me but I don't believe i have the information you were asking for. I should have mentioned that before. Maybe someone else was discussing charts?
Again thanks for your observations.

GF123
Sorry, I thought 10.5p was more recent than 14p, so it wasn't clear to me. As to 4p that's a bit lost on me. What's the significance?
Must have been your chronological confusion I got caught up in so it wasn't so clear to me. :-)

GF123
Back to recent levels? 10.5p?
I thought you were Bullish. :-)

Chelsea7
thankyou for your reply. It was the comment you made that
......it pains me to post negatively, but Sally and Lindy need to step up the mark in knowing how to portray a company with the progress we have made and as our warchest dictates. AIMHO.....
So judging by your subsequent reply to me it wasn't realyl what you meant? I agree she seemed tired but I suppose we should forgive her that?
Thanks again.

Chelsea7
I do not think that LD needs to portray the company at all. She is the reason for the Company's existance. The Commercial and finacial officers are the ones who have to have the PR skills, although with the cash Scancell now holds, the ability to convert the IP to deals via Data is I think what counts. From what I've seen, in her scientific field LD is well thought of so a presentation to the shareholders might not be the way to judge her. She seems in the past to have been very well received at Shareholder meetings so what in particular did you find wrong with her this time?

LL Probably just seems like a lifetime LOL. :-)

LL just saw yours re Dividends.
Since i don't invest for income any dividends I receive are reinvested. As that's the case I've no idea whether any dividend is allocated to my account prior or post the payment date from the paying company's bankers.
Do I understand you correctly when you ask whether my platform would credit my account with a dividend payment before receiving the funds from the company's bankers paying the dividend?
As I say irrelevant to me but I like to try and understand the question. :-)
You sound as if at some time in your career you were involved in stock exchange administration. Would I be right?

LL on a point of order (:-))
II had share allocation, excess shares and returned Cash from Excess share application on the account by EOD Friday 6th. Credit where Credit's due! :-)

BOJO 2020,
Sorry, we crossed. :-(

Scousemark, I think its due to be posted "By 1600" today :-)

LL you do seem to have trouble with IG.
So as you know II Debited accounts for entitlement and cash value of TOTAL excess shares requested on 26th October.
Shares allocated plus excess granted hit account Friday 6th. Cash difference between amount debited and amount required to settle excess shares credited Friday 6th Nov.
Quite straightforward and no calls or problems involved. A smooth set of transactions for both this and the earlier Scancell OO. The allocation of c34% is likely (IMO) to be the allocation Scancell will show as their number. I believe II do not pool applications (resulting in different allocations from different platforms of excess shares from the figure the company advise IDC).
Seems from what you've written IG are unable to get anything right. Does seem strange, but you're the one using them. :-) Bet they love the publicity tyou give them here.

I think that II is a pretty good indicator of the availabilty and scaleback of excess share allocations in that they tend to reflect the actuality of the Company's scaleback on excess share allocations. In the previous OO they allocated at 21% which was Scancell's figure. Since this time they're showing c34% my guess is that that will be Scancell's number. As has ben the case in the past the Pooling of applications by some Platforms will simply represent the individual takeup by platform rather than the overall applications seen by the company. I could be wrong but ot's been the case in the past.

Sorry posted first message it didn't apprear, reposted and two are now here. :-(

I think 34% will be Scancell's figure (ie the actual allocation of excess shares applied for in the OO) as it was 21% for the last OO. Any differences from that figure (if it is the case) will be due to the differing Platforms "pooling" their total applications and then distributing excess shares in proportion to the size of the individual excess applications on their books. Hence the differences being seen. I believe II do not pool their clients' applications.

I think 34% will be Scancell's figure (ie the actual allocation of excess shares applied for in the OO) as it was 21% for the last OO. Any differences from that figure (if it is the case) will be due to the differing Platforms "pooling" their total applications and then distributing excess shares in proportion to the size of the individual excess applications on their books. Hence the differences being seen. I believe II do not pool their clients' applications.