Member Info for douve87

I don't think it's for MHRA to comment or question the commercial/funding side. It's just their job to assess whether drugs are safe, effective and high quality. So I don't think this would be a reason for them to delay responding. I think it's much simpler than that and they're just incompetent or if I'm feeling kind overstretched (resource wise).

I've seen a few people state that just because there's a potential reverse mergerr to take place doesn't mean partnership discussions aren't ongoing but I would disagree. If a partnership was on the cards then there would be no need to to do a reverse merger. As long as there partnership was sufficient size to get through ph3 (and if it isn't why bother) then we will be at a completely different position with successful pH 3 results and could list ourselves on nasdaq then if we decide. I don't see a logic of the reverse merger if a partnership is likely as it would just be unnecessary dilution. In fairness the confirmation on rns from Friday makes no mention of partnership (but I still find this strange considering the strength of our science)?

Im lucky that (hopefully) I have the luxury of time as I'm under 40 but have been holding a significant holding for me since 2012 (luckily just before modi discovery). I do find this annoying tho as it kicks it into it long grass and keeps all the risk with us. A partnership with a large pharma where they cover ph3 cost plus some and we take a cut of sales would be very lucrative and there's been some very large deals done at earlier stages seemingly with lesser science.

I don't see the benefit in incurring this extra cost to acquire a nasdaq listed biotech seemingly with little connection to our science and it's own liabilities. We're going to have to dilute or incur debt just for the opportunity to further dillute to actually fund the ph3 trials. Any uplift in share market cap is going to be negated either by the increased number of shares or restricted due to our extra liabilities. So it will be us shareholders (constantly thanked but seemingly ignored when it comes to what's best for us) who lose out.

Surely it's better to either list ourselves direct (I appreciate it will take longer and still incur costs) or partnership with pharma (my preference). I would also prefer a full sale over this option. Again people will say we wouldn't get full value but there have been some very large deals done so if we can't get a good deal with our science again I look at the BoD and question their business nouse (not science nouse). I think there's a real disconnect between what the scientists want and what the shareholders want. Lastly as previously stated I put little value on advisors recommending we got alone as it's in their interest to advise that as it means more pay days for them and admin fees etc. I hope this has all been orchestrated a negotiation tactic with a large pharma to squeeze more out of them to show we do have other options. I eagerly await further info tho

HenryHistorian I completely agree. For years we have been told that we are looking into non dillutive investment and every time we get dillutive funding. I truly believe our science is potentially world class so I blame the BoD I don't think they have the same motivation as the typical shareholders with the shares at their disposal at very attractive prices (even compared to this price). I also questioned the BoD in the past as I thought they were great scientists but not great directors. I believe this new BoD are more experienced /capable but as stated I think they have different motivations. I am not convinced by the advisers recommending going it alone considering they will get a payday from the raising and plenty will get a payday out of reverse takeover. Whereas us shareholders get a thanks for your support over the years and then further dilluted. People will say we will be able to get a better price in the end but when and how much more? Other biotechs have got some very good deals at similar stages (and earlier) which would equate to over a £1 per share here. The MC of Scancell may greatly increase due to this but will the value of the shares I hold increase? And how many more years will I have to wait. Lastly what will happen if this falls through where does that leave us with funding? This was not the news I was expecting or hoping for at this stage and I hope I am wrong and the shareprice skyrockets if we list in the US.

I disagree. It would should what we rejected and did not even seriously consider so I don't think it would cap offers. But would still show our worth is considerably more than our market cap shows currently.

Vastly increase in value hasn't happened tho has it. Like I say I still think all offers should be shared with all shareholders even if rejected for the reasons already given. There is no negative in knowing what kind of offers we have already rejected

Can't disagree with what you say but it doesn't change the fact that there is still value in sharing any offers with the public even if they are rejected. You're right the share price is derisory but I'm sure if the offers we rejected was shared the share price wouldn't be quite as derisory (even if they are still derisory) which then helps with future negotiations.

But it would serve a purpose. It would give confidence to the wider public. Show scancell is desirable and help show how the market values us. Offers should be made public.

I thought that too but I'm pretty sure that when Richard goodfellow was in charge he said he had received offers and they were never shared with the shareholders?

I thought I remembered that as well and wondered why we were never informed of the details? I thought if an offer was made we would have to be notified.

Hi CrustyPete, i was aware of that that's why I was asking at what stage would they have to inform us shareholders? Even if it was a low offer that was not acceptable to the BoD would they still need to inform us or as they have sufficient majority (share wise) could they just dismiss it and if not which (i assume they can't) how long after the offer is submitted for the BoD to make us shareholders aware? The reason i ask is even a low ball offer would be a shot in the arm for the SP and could help give us an indication of what is a fair price?

Quick question if partnership/ potential sale was being discussed at what stage would they have to inform shareholders? Even if the offer was far too low and the BoD recommended rejection I'm assuming we still need to be informed? Or can the BoD reject a low offer without informing us?

Not saying I believe them but I see a 13 and a 5 trade. If you believe in the MM code supposedly means:

13 - MM running out of inventory

5 - MM out of stock and can no longer lower price.

Anyone expecting news this week. I appreciate none of us on this forum know but anyone got a good feeling about news landing this week? If so are we thinking Thursday which seems to be the norm? Although I consider scan cell to run a tight ship whenever the share price starts to climb an rns usually follows close behind.

I've been invested since 2012 so don't think 6months in the grand scheme of things is that big. We be very pleased if that tarfet is met especially without dilution.

Big positive for me is the line that they still expect to start phase 3 in H2 2026. That doesn't sound like a company who has funding concerns. I appreciate until it's signed and sealed its not definite but they clearly still believe that timetable is realistic. I just wish I knew how they're expecting to fund it.

Happy new year everyone for what will hopefully be prosperous year for us all.

Apologies its lazy (not checking myself) but can someone remind me if we are expecting any updates in January? Thanks

If Chester is right and it is good news they are very good at keeping it quiet (judging by the shareprice slip today).

Think its a little early and a bit pessimistic to make this prediction. I think by the end of the year we will be in a better position to know whether further dilution is required/likely. You may well be right dracula and your welcome to your opinion (and you did caveat it with imo) but i do think its a good sign that Diggle has bought a million more. He is undoubtedly closer to what is happening at scancell than us and has chosen to buy which suggests to me a fundraise/dilution is unlikely imminently otherwise you'd wait for the fundraise. Its not a guarantee, but personally take Diggle's recent purchase as a good sign.

Sorry if being dim or have missed something. What's her connection to scancell? Why do you think she maybe a new hire for investor relations?