Member Info for AB124

I'll finish my point by quoting a post from someone who's just told me that I posted "mostly rubbish". I believe this post makes my point without the need for any more proof.

PLEASE will people think that others might have something worthwhile to say rather than simply insulting them when the "insulters" have rarely been right for any length of time.

I do hope so.

My case is made by this from GF:-

"GF123 Premium Member

Posted in: SCLP

Posts: 1,481

Price: 27.00

No Opinion

RE: SP7 Dec 2022 05:32

Crackin.

With respect you are full of crap. Try gloating all you like.

But the reality here is that genuine LTH will have an average of well less than current 27p SP level. They have supported the company over many years from

Sp highs all the way down to 3.5p.

More importantly the strategy of buy and holding has worked for many here. I’m averaging less than 12p in five different share accounts including two ISAs. (Tax free)

So as Inanaco has said for a long time. It’s how many you hold that counts. (By the way Inanaco. Well done. Maybe some will accept now you were never spouting codswallap).

So come on Crackin. Try and belittle me? (That might give me (and others) some entertainment whilst we watch people scrabble to buy shares). (Maybe you can get your buddies Agema and SK to join in and claim I’m fake?).

We all know what’s been going on over the years. Fake posters attacking scancell on behalf of the so called Sheriff of AIM. Where is he now. Oh so quiet. (Scumbag of AIM more like).

You are one of his merry men. And to try and be smug at this stage of Sclps growth is hilarious. It really is. Trying to claim being right all along. What a joke you really are.

So reality here is 1p rise in Sclp SP for every 1m shares held Crackin. Just think of that. I’ll enjoy that in all five accounts. While you, on the other hand, attempt to trumpet some kind of “trousersed” victory.

The real winners are cancer sufferers, scancell and LHTs and supports (including Redmile and Vulpes) who had faith in little old Sclp. Not the scambags now trying to claim their astuteness.

Enjoy your gloating buddy. As even that is false!

ATB.

PS 1p for every 1m shares held. I’m sure you can do the maths Crackin? Or Maybe Loz can help you? Think I’ll buy a pizza tonight to celebrate! 40oC on the south terrace? Think I’ll burn some logs."

AIMO

The thing that annoys me most is the fact that there are some who can only communicate in a snide and insulting way, whereas the majority are able to hold a reasonable discussion agreeing to disagree.

I guess the proof of the pudding is whether those who have been continually wrong in their view of the Scancell market are able to see that fact and then perhaps soften their (up to now) genrerally incorrect and demonstrable inability to make money, whilst berating those who do..

I have no idea what the outcome for Scancell will be , but I hope that it is as good as the best "Predictions" that are made on this BB.

If that comes to pass I imagine most will make a profit on their holdings. It simply beggars belief that anyone with a massive holding is not prepared to admit that others might have called the market better, particularly when one considers the massive missed opportunities those people have seen (the best part of £1M in one case)!

It's one thing to get it wrong personally, but to insult others who do not is beyond reproach.

AIMO

How's that rubbish when you hold 7M+ shares?

Well any who took profits at 25p+ (who had to endure your rather disparaging taunts) seem to have it all their own way at the moment; so in fairness you'd have to agree that those who did take the risk at the end of last year have actually done rather well.

I'm sure you wouldn't disagree that however you look at it you've really not read the market well over the last six months?

Or maybe you're happy to have incurred what must by now be an opportunity cost in excess of GBP 840,000?

Perhaps it would have been kinder to let those who had a different view from you get on with their ideas for the market's direction rather than incorrectly admonishing and insulting them for their view when your ideas were completely incorrect?

To the average investor your interim portfolio valuations are horrendous, and I am aware that it's small change for you, but you really should let others get on with their own ideas rather than shout insults at them.

AIMO

GF

Good to see you averaging up again.

Well done.

ATB

Crumbs,

"They have recruited a business development officer (arriving September) which is necessary to search out deals but this has not been a straightforward hire, and he sees the need to add to the team around Lindy. A new CFO is being hired, "

Looks to me very much the course of action that Diggle was looking for when he mentioned that a greater focus was required in the Commercialisation of the Platforms.

It also suggests that the boosting of the BOD's real world business acumen was required and is at last being addressed.

Thank heavens for that.

AIMO

Krafty

Thanks for the explanation of why there was/is a "low level reaction".

It's a shame that you seem to be one of the few on this BB to appreciate the likely reaction to the two Conferences.

If you understood the likely outcome why were so many predicting that new information would have to be RNS before/after the event.

Surely it should have been understood that there was likely to be no immediate SP response to the posters.

Perhaps, Krafty, you could update the BB before the next such conference on the dangers of overexpecting only to be underwhelmed by the reaction which you have so succinctly explained below.

Time and time again the BB is whipped up into events being more important for the SP than they actually are.

Please be patient, it's much better to be pleasantly surprised by information releases than bitterly disappointed.

If there is no further RNS then I suspect in the short term the SP will demonstrate the disappointment of overexpectations being bandied around yet again.

Bermudashorts called it right (but then again he generally does).

AIMO

I doubt it!

AIMO

Crumbs,

you say,

"If the data is not whizz bang as you seemed to imply that would only sink SP as the AIM numpties love a bit of doom even if it's only perceived and not real.... still I'm sure most LTH would like to see data updates when there are significant patient numbers to report on... despite what data is.."

Firstly I'm not implying anything. If you think about what I wrote you'll see that I felt maybe the idea from Scancell is to await meaningful datasets which by definition will only arise later in the trials.

You also posted,

"I don't think it is about spectacular or good or indifferent or indeed poor data I think it is all about numbers of evaluable patients again others have done the working out but I believe we are now significantly beyond 13 evaluable patients.."

I have no idea when it would be sensible to put out Trial data in the context of the company managing the SP.

It seems that you would agree with my view formed ages ago that it was very unhelpful to have been forced into acknowledging the results from one patient so early in a trial.

Whether anyone likes it or not if every patient in that trial has not responded in the same manner as the the patient publicised last year you run the danger of any updates with numbers and details of individual results not being as extraordinary as that first acknowledged being seen as disappointing. Do you think that the Company would have mentioned an individual result without being forced into having to acknowledge it? I very much doubt it. Do you think that all trial participants will have responded to the same degree? I very much doubt that too.

So maybe we might reasonably expect any updates at this stage would be limited to numbers recruited and dosed and massive generalisations - encouraging , positive etc - about results (however good they might be). Putting it that way round -However good - does that make me a ramper (ref your comment in my first quote from you)?

I think many on this bb will be disappointed if the results from the current trials are only good, rather than spectacular.

I think this has arisen from almost indoctrination from 2012 when it has been suggested that Scancell is a world beater and there's nothing to touch it. Sadly only this BB (and a few other lay associates) seem to believe that line. So rather than take the word of a few clever non Academic specialist "scientists" Pharma have decided to wait for ten years plus to see what trial results produce.

Then and only then will we see what value Pharma put on Scancell's platforms. It might happen before the end of trials, it might not, but I'm certain any buyers will want proof of the platforms' worth.

So it seems unlikely that our first "published" patient's results are being replicated throughout the trial.

That said and if I'm right how helpful do you think that information leak was? It created excitement which cannot be supported and so the SP sank. Should it have ever gone to 29p ?

I doub

Crumbs,

OK maybe many would like to see more info put out by Scancell because it would bolster the SP.

You made me think with your last rreply that maybe our Science oriented CEO is actually holding back the announcements with a view to wanting to present the best possible data sets before telling the World about the products.

There is some evidence for this when Vulpes expressed some frustration with the way Commercialisation has been managed thus far.

So perhaps it's all to do with the Company's makeup rather than the aggressive commercialisation so many crave.

AIMO

Crumbs,

so what if the data is good but not spectacular, even though maybe the Company expect that to improve as the trial(s) progress? Would you want to go public before you have those improved results from the current data logged so far?

I don't believe that the Company has to disclose trial results until the trial is complete, so maybe keeping one's powder dry re results is a sensible course to sail.

In which case the chances of immediate spectacular announcements seem somewhat premature.

I'd really like to see something blockbusting announced on Monday but is that really realistic? I guess it isn't so I can wait.

AIMO

The lack of new information really shouldn't be disappointing to anyone on this BB.

I believe Bermudashorts told everyone as much in that the Poster data date was some time ago and not to expect any very recent information.

We all know it's a waiting game, but as ever there's a load of expectation whipped up.

One day Scancell will announce, but until they decide when that is we can but all simply wait.

I hate to say it but I really do HOPE we get some news before late 2023. Maybe this year's AGM will bring some welcome news. Anything before that is a bonus (and counting day numbers vs dosing dates to the Nth degree is probably not the best way forward).

A watched pot and all that.

Enjoy the weather; looks pretty good for the nearterm.

AIMO

TF,

Yeah, but if one pharma agrees then the market will (if they start buying!!

As you'll appreciate RW made things very easy to make my point (and I believe you understand what I'm saying) so hopefully we can sit back and wait for the PROVEN scientific benefits of Scancell's platforms to be reflected in the SP!

It's been a long time coming but I suspect we're closing in on the end game with rather more speed than we've become accustomed to in all matters Scancell.

Let's hope we all benefit from the outcome...

BTW it's possible to buy SCLP sub 14.4 in some size ATM.

Maybe that'll tempt someone this sunny afternoon.

AIMO

TF,

I'll use your response to RW (yet another of his another futile attempts to "weaponise" the science) merely to point out that however good the science the market has to agree and it seems to me that over the last few years the SP has not provided an equal correlation to the Science). Hopefully the Market is wrong,

Hence an unshakeable belief in, "the science will see us through" has thus far not, demonstrably, been a profitable investment strategy.

That said nobody invested here would presumably be a shareholder if they didn't believe that the science has value, BUT the timing of taking their final "buy in" is the key to success or otherwise.

I suspect most traders will have a core holding around which they trade.

So why not take up RW's sarcastic idea of,

"" Have you reminded Inanaco 'over there' that great minds on here have spoken - 'It doesn't matter what anyone "thinks of the science".'"

As ever RW has taken a comment out of context in another failed attempt to ridicule.

Sadly Inanaco will have no difficulty in understanding the massive opportunity cost that his twelve year Buy and Hold strategy has had on his (current depleted "Investment") which any basic follower of TA will have certainly been able to

better handsomely (if not significantly).

There are some posters even here who are posting that they wish they'd taken some profits along the way. The idea although coming late is (I imagine) what many here will - secretly - wish they'd thought of themselves.

So, TF, thanks for your input.

AIMO

Rob, you and I both know that I was discussing the science in the context of some posters "weaponising" it against other posters, much, actually, as you have attempted to do.

I very much doubt that even the most ardent TA follower would wish the science to fail. In fact the failure of the science would be a loss to everyone, investors and patients (and potential patients) both.

AIMO

It doesn't matter what anyone "thinks of the science".

The SP is where it is and anyone who has sage thoughts on the Science who has held their shares since early December has paid the price of thinking that "having a view on the science" is the be all and end all of Scancell.

It is not and hasn't been for eleven or twelve years.

It's so annoying to have a "told you so" poster being goaded by people who think that an elementary understanding of the "science2 gives them the right to attempt to ridicule anyone else.

Neither side has the higher ground here, technicals and a blind faith in the science have both failed for varying reasons over SCLP's long and chequered history.

Maybe if the "scientists" here would consider other views then the BB would be a better place..

AIMO

Hi Chester.

I'm probably going to get heavily criticised for this but expectation management might well come into play here, quite apart from the requirements and restrictions of Trial Running.

Why on earth would Scancell shout about the extraordinary success of one patient's outcome when there are many others taking part in the trial?

If (and I hope that this is not the case) Trish is displaying amazing results but others on the trial are "simply" seeing disease progression halted surely feeding a frenzy with Trish's fantastic results will draw many to conclude that the "PR" of pushing the extraordinary results was somewhat misplaced.

It's a bit like getting everyone on this BB waiting for some sort of RNS on a specific date only for the RNS not to appear.

People eventually get p*ssed off because they've been led to believe something will happen and then it doesn't.

Do that too many times and interest evaporates.

No, I think it's much better that Scancell keep quiet and then release the info we all hope is the case with the weight of Hard Data to support the very encouraging early result.

Just think how it would be if there were many Trishs appearing in the full data. Now THAT would be wonderful and unarguable.

Under promise and over deliver, not the other way round.

AIMO

Cleaner

"Why is Scancell so quiet on Trish ? nothing at all ".

Pretty straightforward I'd say.

Either the data collected so far is not sufficiently outstanding to make a fuss..... (IE FIngers crossed for the rest).

OR

Data to date is supporting the extraordinary results and they don't want to go off Half C*ck.

Either way we'll see IDC.

I'm hopeful that the latter scenario is the case!

AIMO

C7,

Just for clarity the 100K trade at 15.55 was cancelled. There is/was no trade for 100 buy or sell at 15.55 (or 15.51).

So the total of 100K trades today is 3 (2x100 16.00 and 1x100 16.04).

If that's wrong the LSE(exchange official trades) site is wrong.

The good bit is they're all on the buy side. :-)

Hope you don't mind me clarifying. I say this because it shows that the first trade wasn't the brilliant price it looked as it was cancelled and if any of the subsequent trades were the result of that then the buyer had to pay up. I would agree with you that price would have been unlikely to be a sell (had it been a real (or reportable) trade).

ATB

C7

Can't see the reinstatement a15.15 nor 15.55 but I was looking at the LSE (xchange) List.

never mind there's the couple of trades at 16 showing. That'll do! :-)