Member Info for douve87

Very good post. I like the analogy but at the same time that kind of implies we are still awaiting data but we already have data and yet no deal? We've had stage1/2 results for scib1 since the end of 2016 and the IND for scib1 combi stage 2 should have been submitted in H1 2017. We always seem to be waiting for the next results expecting the market to finally value them but for whatever reason they don't. The only thing that will, will be a commercial deal and plenty of other biotechs have secured great deals pre clinical so why not us? To continue the analogy I see Lindy as a world class coach whos prepared and done all she can to make us Olympic gold winners but unfortunately on the final corner the baton's been dropped and it's taking hell of a lot of time for it to be picked up again. Can't blame the coach but can blame the runner. Ultimately I still believe it will come good (and very good) but hope that's before my retirement (I'm 31).

Thanks I thought more had been said but clearly not. Yeah it seems a bit of kop out as it goes without saying it's relative term otherwise he would have had to give a numerical timescale (6months etc). I was hoping he was going to give some context to it. Are we talking short term compared to a fly's life or a decade (which compared to a millennium is short). I agree it was unnecessary, foolish and naive to say it in first place in his 1st interview especially when you look at shareprice now. Onwards and upwards though (hopefully).

Can't remember who but didnt someone who attended yesterday say jc defined near to short term (in relation to monitizing assets). If not a sarcastic comment I would be interested to know what his definition was? Can anyone help?

How low could it go? Seriously though I am annoyed. I appreciate it was John glencross not the co who said it was on target but he would have got that from the company I don't think he would have just made that up without some guidance from the company. But equally the last time the bod did talk about timescales they stated everything was still on schedule. The fact they're now talking h1 2019 not q1 suggests they must have known there were issues (not minor issues and slight delays) for a while and yet have remained silent. I can't see any positive news before the AGM and of truth be known doubtful any this year at all. I can't make the AGM but think it will be an awkward one for them and rightly so. Just hoping we actually get some answers from them!

I don't think any of us disagree that we have potentially impressive newsflow to come but we seem to have been waiting for so long and it keeps being pushed back even 3rd parties (cruk) are having delays now. Also we have had amazing results and news in the past which has had little or no effect on the shareprice. Why is this? Lack of pr? Lack of contacts by bod? Results not as good as we believe? Or for some reason the market cant value us whilst valuing other biotechs much greater? And it does make me question the bod when one of them says we are looking to monitize assets in the near to short term followed by radio silence. Then in the results on Tues they states we are considering other funding options? Convinced the science will see us through but almost feel it will be in spite of the bod. Also makes me wonder how much more Lindy could have achieved if she had a bod as good as she is a scientist and some of these other biotechs who've secured commercial deals have.

Dam autocorrect changed balerno to valero

I agree Valero the tone seems different in the forward in the statements. They're not negative but not as positive as previously some might say they're more balanced now. Now of they started off like that fine but it's concerning when they start off positive and then become less so. There's the inclusion of "if successful" but also it talks of the hope of commercial transactions but in the meantime will consider other funding options. My recollection was that the last few reports have been focussed on monitizing assets/commercial deals. Now other funding options are being considered again, Why? Why can't we secure a commercial deal?

I'm thinking the AGM will be interesting this year. Not necessarily from a news perspective but I believe there will be a lot of disgruntled investors annoyed by lack of commercial progress and updates. Although it's probably not sclp fault it's typical that sclp's habit of missing and pushing back timelines has rubbed off on CRUK. As always jam tomorrow when so many other similar companies are having jam today. Why not us?

Thank you for your enthusiasm and knowledge it is much appreciated and brings much to the bb, but do you not see your confidence also raises further questions. Generating further questions and sparking debate is not a bad thing, but if the debate speculates a contrary view there is no need to take personal offence or question the integrity of the poster. If the science is as good and proven as you believe and we all hope it raises the question why no deal for us when our science is better? In my eyes it's either we're missing something regarding our science/results compared to others out there or the bod don't have the commercial expertise necessary to do these kind of deals. I believe it's the latter, I think they're all fine scientists acting with integrity and the science will eventually see us through but due to their commercial naivety we will have to endure this share price and a longer wait than we deserve. As always I welcome contrary views though.

That was the point I was trying to make last week.

I agree it's very promising how many big names are getting involved with us but none of them are putting their hands in their pockets at present; and that's what I'm waiting for.

Basically I'm more intrigued by the "left field announcement" and "monetizing our assets in the near to short term" which have been more than implied and I feel will have a much bigger impact on scancell and our shareprice. But as ever im frustrated by the lack of updates/progress on either of these matters. Before anyone says they can't announce details of a deal until its signed or points to ndas; I am aware but if that's the reason don't state near to short term or imply that you expect to leave your successor with funds to spend (just creating a rod for your back). Anyway I think the AGM could be interesting if there's no big news before then.

Although I'm not counting my chickens, as winners won't be known to Nov, I do feel we have a very good chance of winning one of the grants. However I do worry the significance of the award with regards the impact it will have on scancell is being exaggerated, not deliberately to mislead but out of mixture of excitement and desperation that finally something may act as a springboard for sclp. With regards to value of scancell an extra 20million (which we wouldn't get the whole amount of as it's a collaboration) would only take us to a shareprice of 17.55p (not helped by recent further dillution). I also understand the award would offer further recognition. But we've already been recognised by cancer groups and some of the biggest scientists wanting/willing to work with us in the states, by CRUK taking scib1 forward and by Biontech as well as our already sterling results and we sit at 12.35p. But unfortunately until the first big commercial deal is signed I don't think the grand challenge announcement will cause the wider market to reevaluate us. It will just be the start of another trial (well hopefully within 12-18months from Nov 18 anyway) which all being well the results 12months from then could lead to something positive. Not trying to be negative as all points mentioned above are positive scientifically but don't see any reason why our share price will improve any time soon especially based on bod's past actions. As mentioned before, im just worried they lack the commercial expertise necessary and i've been waiting a long time for them to demonstrate these expertise. Hope I am wrong and I welcome contrary views to mine above. Just don't want to get too carried away by the grand challenge when really it just begins another 30month timeline to yet more results.

Regulators have upgraded vm. balance sheet. Our core capital ratio has been increased by 250 points to 16% which analysts believe could force CYBG to improve offer. Well I was unhappy with offer price anyway so I certainly hope they do.

Dam, I didn't realise it would take so long. Over 18months to start? Just hope our other trials have started by then.

Anyone know when the CRUK scib2 trials are meant to start? Or have they already started?

Have you seen the share price on else. Properly tricked me for a second. I was wondering what I had missed. Hopefully a prediction for what's to come.

I know I'm not alone in feeling frustrated and just for the record have been here since 2012 and never sold any (wish I had when they were around 60p tho) so either I'm committed to the company or need committing. Oldnotwise I agree that the lack of a commercial deal is what's holding us back shareprice wise but what my rant was trying to ask is why we're still waiting for a commercial deal? And the only reason I can see is our bod lack the relevant expertise but I would welcome opposing views. I just feel our science, results, ip with another bod would have secured a commercial deal by now which would have stopped the share dilution, removed the funding elephant and I'd imagine we would be much more advanced results wise by now (as funding as certainly delayed and altered plans here). Convinced we will get there but questioning the bod' s commercial expertise.

This bod do frustrate me. Other companies with seemingly lesser science and results will shout it form the rooftops and get on bbc/sky. Whilst we seemingly have amazing science/results/ip and strong foundations and connections but for some reason don't like to broadcast it? I know people may say those other companies' share prices may fluctuate more than ours but so what, why can't we enjoy a substantial gain even if it is only temporary. No share price no matter how good the company is only goes up; whilst our share price may be relatively steady but unfortunately it's a steady decline. As always convinced the science will come good (even if only one platform is successful and there's no reason why that would be the case we will be looking at substantial gains) and as scientists the bod are currently untouchable but as I keep saying I'm not convinced they have the commercial expertise required to get the most out the company's assets and I fear we will be sold short when that EVENTUALLY happens. Hope I'm wrong and will happily eat my words when the first commercial deal is signed (as long as it's a good deal). However, the longer we go without a commercial deal when other companies with lesser science at earlier stages get them for very exciting figures the more it's makes you wonder what wrong with scancell. In my eyes it could only be down to one of three things the science, the bod, or something that makes us uninvestable. I don't doubt the science, I don't think I'm missing anything making us uninvestable (sound foundations, ip, money management, and connections) which only leaves the bod. They keep say we're walking through open doors but I can't help thinking we're walking past open doors. Anyway rant over and hope everyone's enjoying the weather and footy.

I get the same impression that the only sticking point is the licensing deal for the virgin brand. And agree he's not bothered about increasing the offer. Quite annoying as I think most pi would agree current offer is not enough, and the "improved offer' is actually a decrease.