Member Info for douve87

For the record im not selling, im.convinced by the science. But equally convinced if we had a different bod who were more commercially savvy we'd be in a completely different position shareprice wise.

Personally i wouldn't take anything for granted regarding funding. The amount of times we have said the bod must have something lined up either due to a positive press release or the fact they've hired more staff and its been said thats a sign they know where funding is coming from and it hasn't. Equally we've all been shocked in the past when we've announced very promising data and people have thought it can't be ignored by big pharma this time and is (hence where we are today). Hope they really have got something lined up this time otherwise i personally (and may be in a minority here) but would have preferred them to concentrate on their existing platforms instead of trying to further stretch their already limited funding resources or further share dilution.
Not questioning the science but as yet to be convinced by the bod's commercial nous (waiting to be impressed). Otherwise id consider it naive to constantly sign new research projects, and expand remits with only optimism that funding will arrive.

I was annoyed when CYBG bought vm as it was not a good deal for shareholders. Good for Branson with additional fee for using the name but not enough for the shares. Felt vm was better positioned on own (without any PPI claims) or waiting for a different partner. Looking at the shareprice now I'm incredibly annoyed and wished I sold when CYBG took over (even though vm was worth more). Anyway rant over, the vm part of the bank is good so as long as the management don't completely f it up then it should recover from these prices.

Should say x billion per year. I know cancer drug market is more than a billion per year.

This may be a dim question but does anyone have any idea/indication how big this glycans market potentially could be? With cancer we're constantly told it estimated to be worth billion per year by 2020 etc. But with glycans I've got no idea how big the potential market is. Please note I'm aware that you have to take all estimates with a pinch of salt and scancell can't have the entire cancer drug market but at least it gave somewhere to start with regards potential.

Obviously not blaming dad lol should be fda (bloody autocorrect).

Possible explanations
Either the science is not as good as everyone thinks and the bod is overselling it (fault of bod).
Or I am, along with most other private investors is missing/misunderstanding a crucial aspect of our science (again fault of bod).
Or bod thru lack of experience incapable of doing large commercial deal whereas another experienced bod with our science would have secured a deal years ago and probably completed the upcoming studies by now.
I am also starting to worry about what the bod aren't telling us about why fda won't approve us. Seems a bit simplistic to blame ichor or dad. Surely the bod can do something to expediate it or give us more info on what's caused the delay.

Hi Chelsea, before I start I love your constant optimism especially under you circumstances and ultimately I believe I share your optimism for the future of scancell but it's because of that optimism and belief in scancell that leads to my frustration. To give you another view as requested I don't think I've personally ever called the bod incompetent more incapable of doing a commercial deal (of sufficient size) not through lack of effort but lack of experience. Scientifically I am very pleased with the progression of scancell but commercially very very disappointed. To summarise the areas the bod of let us down
1) Lack of a commercial deal, the deal with vulpes is positive but it is peanuts amounts. Although it is an endorsement we will need more funds in 6-12months time and whatever way you look at it its further dilution. I agree it shows a certain amount of validation for scancell but at 5p and total investment of just over 3mill it's not that much of a gamble for vulpes. If we were still at 18p to 30p a share would they have invested? We don't know but supposedly we tried previously and they didn't (although science has progressed). Which leads to the question why can we get a large commercial deal for our science when its so good (and from my limited understanding it is). Other seemingly lesser and earlier stage biotechs have and yet we can't. I agree our planned scientific progression makes sense and should lead to greater things but it would be equally applicable to all these other biotechs with deals. Why do we have jump through so many hoops? What are we missing or am I misunderstanding? The longer we take to do a commercial deal, ultimately the slower our progression to market is(which ultimately is the more important to get it to the patient and money as well) and the more chance someone or something better usurps us?
2) the bod is incapable of giving or sticking to realistic timescales. Every timeline we have missed and we're still not back in human studies? This increases costs and delays any potential deal (if it's dependent on the result of human studies).
3) the infamous famous quote that scancell was now entering stage of commercial activity when JC first joined 18months approx back and before the last 2 dillutions.
4) I refuse to be pleased about the share price going from 3p to 9p. It may be very good for new investors but along with the dillutions has not been good for lth. Although I appreciate some have averaged down and I agree 3p was ridiculous price I was not willing or in a position to add more (other priorities). So a lesser is loss is still a loss and not something to celebrate, and something I think could and should have been handled better by bod (we should never have got to 3p).

So unless I've missed something, another deadline (human trial to start) has been missed. We do seem to be incapable of meeting our own deadlines even when they are vague and seem incredibly generous. I appreciate that it is hopefully only going to be a week or two on this occasion but it's still annoying the bod can't or won't keep us accurately up to date with progress.

Going back to my comment earlier. Does anyone have any views on what today's transaction means for a potential Biontech commercial deal? Interested to hear other views?

Obviously pleased we have money to keep the lights on but like Knowles says in another 6 months will be in same position. But what I want to know is what does this mean for our Biontech collaboration. The reason I ask is if we are about to do a commercial deal (in a number of weeks) with them why have we raised £3million at 5p? Either means no commercial deal likely in short term or we've just had further dilution at an unnecessarily low price? Not being negative but as always I'm waiting for a commercial deal!!! And im not convinced the board have the skills to do one (others have at earlier stages with less science so why not us).

Sorry to keep coming back to this as you are right it's just regarding the term bed and isa. But I am right is saying that it is only a bed and isa transaction if it involves selling shares from a normal trading account transferring cash to isa and purchasing same shares in isa. If you're just selling shares already held in an isa and buying different shares in isa that is just trading not bed and isa-ing

Sorry ignore that message roses. Weirdly that message from ratcliffe wasn't appearing on my phone then it appeared. Cheers

Hi roses. Sorry but was your last message agreeing with me or have I missed a message from ratcliffe? Not fishing for compliments lol, but if I have misunderstood bed and isa would rather know.

I thought bed and isa was where let's say you have£100k of sclp shares in a normal trading account and want to protect them from future cgt so sell £20k (annual isa limit) in normal trade account and buy £20k again in isa of same shares (allowing for costs). If you have £100k of shares in isa already and decide to sell all of them then buy a different company's shares surely thats just trading in an isa, not a bed and isa. But I agree if you have £100k of shares in an isa (made up of multiple tax years annual allowances) then there's no limit to how much of that you sell in order to buy shares in another company. That was my understanding anyway, pleased to accept I'm wrong if anyone can explain why?

Not denying that today's rns is yet further support from the scientific community but I don't think we should get carried away. We already had support/recognition/validation from the scientific community what we don't have is enough funding or a commercial partner and presumably this specialist advisory board is another expense for scancell. Logic should dictate that all of the cancer/scientific bodies as well as leading scientists being so involved in scancell indicates we have something and commercial deals should follow but I've been thinking that since I first invested in 2012. As stated above I'm not deramping as it's is positive news but I still have concerns that the bod do not have the necessary skills to complete a commercial deal (seemingly lesser biotechs with lesser science and less support if any support from the calibre scancell have, have secured good deals without jumping through all the hoops we have and yet we still have no deal). As said pleased with the news and the shareprice increasing from what I'm sure we all agree is ludicrously low but I refuse to get excited about approaching 5p. What we need is a commercial deal!

I admire your optimism, but I remember a lot of people saying last year when we did collaboration deals with isa and biontech that we wouldn't of signed deals with them and they wouldn't have signed with us if we didn't have some plan for how we were going to fund it. And people started saying they must know something. Then in April last year placing. So the fact we've hired 2 new people unfortunately doesn't mean anything except our spending will increase. Have to agree with some people here due to our size and limited resources I can't help but think we're overstretched (over ambitious) and would be better off focusing in one or 2 areas, then build on that once we do deals but only then. And as I've said multiple times I'm not convinced by bods ability to do commercial deals by the fact they haven't done one (others have with a lot less then we've got). Not trying to be negative, no intention of selling and still convinced by science but frustrated by bod.

Although the appointments are promising I'm not surprised they've had no impact on for 2 reasons; 1 this is AIM 2 the science and development was never the issue or reason we're at this shareprice. It's funding and commercial deals we are lacking and if anything 2 appointments of such calibre won't come cheap so actually could be seen to exacerbate the funding issue. Don't miscontrue this as deramping. I see the value but I already did. For somebody who didn't their appointments add nothing.

Not trying to be negative and ultimately we agree the work and science lindy and her team have done will eventually get the recognition it deserves and reward the shareholders too. Just frustrated with the bod, and am convinced a different commercially savvy bod would have achieved more not just for the shareholders but enabling lindy to progress her science further and quicker. Ruck as much as I would love to retire shortly not likely but I was trying to make the point that I did not buy into sclp as a retirement nest egg and after 6 years did not expect the price to be at 8p.

Novartis is exactly my point, it's a company worth 225billion. Equally I'm aware of Biontech connection with Genentech. So surely we should be aiming to do a deal with Genentech. What the biggest deal Biontech have done 270million and that was a company buying into them not the other way round. If we holding off for a bigger deal for more proven science I want more than 270 million for use of one of our platforms. (I'm not sneezing at 270million but just disagreeing that's the type of deal we're holding off for)?