Member Info for emptyend

Thats my point! At the AGM I was explicitly told that the potential deal was fully negotiated already!

Whilst the full evaluation period for the exclusive deal runs until year end, it occurred to me overnight that there is no absolute certainty that it will do so. There is nothing to stop the company concerned reaching their conclusions a few weeks earlier than they had thought might be required and signing the full deal that is already on the table.

If it is obviously working for their needs, why would they not just crack on asap?

Chester18,

Timing is very straightforward and has been made clear previously:

THE COMPANY will be advised in December. The end of December is nearly 7 months from 12/6/24. The deal is fully negotiated (confirmed at the AGM) and ready to go - so we can expect an announcement either at the very end of December (if no go) or in the first few days of January.

What that deal covers, however, may be of particular interest…..?

Good point about pushing the boundaries, tf.

At one point in the AGM the Chairman made the same point that it is always more difficult for novel scientific approaches to gain traction quickly. Indeed many established companies will have hoped that the novel, disruptive, approach simply doesn’t work.

For an example in another industry, consider Tesla. It was formed in 2003 but only started to make progress in 2004 when Musk appeared as lead investor. But as late as late 2010, you could still buy the shares for $5 each (in present post-splits) terms. I know this because I nearly did……

……so at least 7 years from the lead investor coming in to take-off point for the share price (triggered, for Tesla, by a JD Power analysis).

Count back from today to when Vulpes and Redmile came on board Scancell. We are now getting close, IMO, to the “JD Power moment” when someone influential will highlight the potential of Lindy’s approach.

I’d recommend attending the next corporate event and acquainting yourself with the new Chairman, CEO and some of the recent hires. There has been an absolutely huge upgrade in the quality of people in the last year or so - and the reasons for that are about to become very clear, IMO.

Cobblers, Matt. 🙄

Yup. Fundamentally those who are peddling personalised vaccines have “bribed” the NHS and the Department of Health by paying for a whole bunch of stuff. They and Government should be aggressively called out on this because it is neither in the interests of patients, nor in the interests if the public purse.

In particular, Wes Streeting should be TOLD to grow a pair and root out this piece of Tory-led corruption.

Totally agree, Bermuda - but the person responsible is Patrick Vallance. Listen to his recent evidence to the Lords Committee. He owns this stupidity 100% - and unless he broadens out (as per Burble’s comment) and stops thinking only of big pharma, he should be fired.

I explained in response to moonparty I think re timings. Just read back. 🙄🙄🙄

I’ve rarely read such total drivel as has been posted on these boards since Monday’s open. The only unexpected thing that has happened since Monday has been a slight (overall positive) adjustment to expected future event timings.

Ray, I think your timeline can be fine-tuned from LD’s interview yesterday, coupled with the AGM:

1. Second antibody deal - first two weeks of January. May get an update on the first deal at the same time and possible milestone payment?

4. Early Modi-1 data in April

Agree the SCIB timings.

So, by May they should have enough data to begin to refine their strategic options - and get deals finalised for the registration trial.

Crusty,

It REALLY doesn’t matter!

I’m on hols by the way, so just popping in.

I’m also pretty clear after talking with most of the Board at the AGM that they have a clear plan. That doesn’t mean that they are going to do A B and C in that order, but they know that there are 2-3 crucial decision points coming up in 2025 and they are assembling the data needed to choose the optimum path forward.

Whether that optimum path requires more investment and a five year timeline, or whether it involves major value realisation in 2025, I don’t think they yet know. But Phil has been hired to work through all the options and ensure the Board makes the right decision, based on proper data and market assessments.

They have the right structure to do this now, at long last!

……”will the re-rate ever come?”

Remember……Nobody expects the Spanish Acquisition - their chief weapon is surprise. 😏

In my opinion, Crusty, funding for the trials will be clear in the next 4-5 months. Judging from the confident way in which the funding Q was dealt with at the AGM (listen back), they already have a number of options that will not require fresh equity. Remember that 50% ish of the shares are controlled by the board, so they are not going to be in the business of diluting themselves.

Normally I would regard funding as a significant issue - but I think the range of options here is so extensive that there is a genuine strategic choice to be made.

I think they will probably get a partner to fund it.

Crusty,

Re your 7.58, cohort 2 uptake simply reflects the very much lower rate if use if that checkpoint inhibitor in the UK. This was mentioned at the AGM.

Burble, The antibody deal is already fully negotiated. But exactly what that deal is - and whether it is for an antibody or a platform - is unknown as yet.

Remember the fully-negotiated antibody deal.....

Ps….click the Director deals tab.

It was. That is the source for LSE holdings data.

Correct. But there is no evidence that Kennedy DOES actually think otherwise! If you read his views, you’ll see they are squarely aimed at big pharma and food companies who have used legions of lobbyists to (allegedly) push through products that may have safety/health implications down the track. See https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2024/11/15/nx-s1-5191947/trump-rfk-health-hhs for examples.

What he is definitely NOT against is helping peoples’ bodies be better, both by eating healthier stuff and by treatments which have few side-effects.

Scancell’s focus is on helping the body’s own immune system target and kill cancers by efficiently directing T cells to attack the cancer cells. They are also conspicuously not remotely a part of “big pharma”.

If Kennedy gets confirmed, I think Scancell should be lobbying him to look at SCIB1/iSCIB+ and Modi1/2 as healthier, more effective ways to help the body tackle cancers…….think what impact an endorsement of any sort might have for such a small company and its novel approach to the problem of cancer (and possibly other diseases in due course).