Member Info for emptyend

“ PURA has approved the tender strategy for contracting a rig to drill the Chikumbi-1 well and perform a workover on the Ntorya-1 well, along with all related services. APT has informed Aminex that it will be requesting expressions of interest from the relevant service contractors next week.”

In my view they will want CH-1 and NT-1 tested and completed comfortably before the pipeline is completed, rather than relying on completion equipment etc spec’d off pre-drill expectations. Accordingly I’d guess all drilling will be completed between December and April.

Chester,

You need to have a closer look at the shareholder register. If you think the holders of nearly 50% of the shares are going to accept (never mind recommend) a “derisory offer”, you need your head examining!! 🙄🙄😂😂

The correct value is ONLY going to be achieved when a serious bidder engages with the Board, without immediately being told to go forth and multiply.

What retail and the AIM market think is completely and utterly irrelevant.

No we don't, chester.

The AIM market is utterly irrelevant in the final analysis. It is only useful for creating more entry points for Vulpes and others.

By the way, "derisory" was at 17p.

I’m not sure it matters.

What matters is the view of the industry watching…..

….in the governance of the oil and gas sector:

https://www.observer24.com.na/steering-namibias-oil-with-an-unusual-crew/

There was a bit of a kerfuffle in the US yesterday over pre-clinical results for a treatment claiming to be Keytruda Mark 2:

https://www.investing.com/news/company-news/hcw-biologics-reports-promising-results-for-new-cancer-immunotherapy-93CH-4208900

….though the company involved appears to have been hit with various lawsuits over the last year or so.

But it is interesting to see the way their treatment is described:

“[checkpoint inhibitors) are designed to help the immune system fight cancer, but they often only work for a small percentage of patients, and results are not always long-lasting.

HCW Biologics said its version aims to go a step further: not only releasing the “brake” on the immune system but also activating immune cells and helping them infiltrate solid tumors, such as those seen in pancreatic and ovarian cancer. “

I’m looking forward to the Modi-1 update.

Guff

I’d assumed you were making a fresh point somewhere in that post…..ie at the end……

If you quote previous posts, how about using quotation marks or the old telex QUOTE/UNQUOTE approach? Or, better, still, just link to the original post….. which avoids confusion completely.

No re-prioritisation is needed, Bermuda. Clinical development of SC134 will be in the new sub, which IMO will be fully funded by a JV partner who will take a stake for cash* and then fund SC134/Glymab development through to IPO or sale.

*the cash will then be available for the Scancell vaccine business and will fund the SCIB1+ registration trial…..and possibly Modi1/2 trials too, again with a partner if required.

WTP,

Remember the Glymabs business is being separated, so there will necessarily be some redefinition of roles.

Re the Fingerpaint point, that is pretty interesting in the current context:

SC134……LungRepair

ISCIB1+……SkinCure

Modi1……TumorMelt

etc….

Bermuda,

The ownership isn’t changing. It is simply like moving something from your left hand to your right hand. If remains 100% controlled. Your understanding is wrong.

Bermuda,

There is no reason why an AGM resolution is needed for IP transfer to Glymab Therapeutics, because this is currently a 100%-owned subsidiary. However, in the event that there is a disposal or part-disposal proposed, then an AGM resolution (or, more likely, EGM) would be needed to give authority for any “significant” disposal (formerly known as a Class 1 disposal, being at least 25% of the company). I’d guess that a Glymab deal wouldn’t breach that threshold.

No. Highly unlikely to have a close period starting in August.

At a 40%+ discount to derisory, it would be rude not to…..

Do you believe in magic too?

Where do you suppose those “15 million” came from?

Small net buyer…..perhaps 10 mn total buys, versus 8.5mn block sales. Clearly institutional…..which is interesting but, unless they were also one of the placees last year, we’re a way off seeing a holdings RNS. But the professional market will know who it is - and perhaps worry that they don’t have a stake yet themselves?

JohnnyB1,

The only buy there is the 5mn. The 4.15mn was prised out of a seller who had been looking to sell at 10p. The other 850k would have been accumulated. With the seller cleared, the price rose. The only Q is who the buyer and seller are.

Hopefully on the beach, krafty…..

The point about timing is that Genmab already have significant information. It just hasn’t been shared publicly.

If they were interested in doing a deal, they would keep what they know to themselves (other than anything the agreement with Scancell obliges them to disclose).

Anyway….merely speculation at this point.

Raypointer,

Let us suppose Genmab wanted to buy 50% of something Scancell own 100% of…….including milestone payments that might amount to $1.25bn. The absolute minimum for such a deal would be the PV of potentially half those milestone payments, plus the value of other IP, including SC134. This sounds to me as if it should be a cash amount in excess of the current market cap, if the two Mabs under licence are progressing well, as we have been given to understand. Some of that would need to go back into development in the JV - but far from all.

Some interesting nuances there that lead me to two expectations:

1. The Modi products will also utilise the CVLP route and

2. The Glymab Therapeutics company will be a JV with (probably) Genmab and there will be a significant upfront payment to Scancell which will largely fund the registration trial for iSCIB1+

We’ll see soon enough.