Member Info for emptyend

Hi Burble,

Where is the reference to Modi-1 patients in connection with the isolation please?

Not really relevant, given market caps and failing companies…..

Seller done, I think. There was a trade last Thursday (I think) which looked like a clearing of position.

One point I’d note on the “what he’s up to” question from tf…..

…..many corporate mergers fail due to having too many executives for the post-merger number of executive chairs available. I don’t think that will be a problem with Scancell……

I would prefer a substantial RNS on Tuesday…..

The 311k will just be a clearing out of the seller. It wasn’t me…..I paid 3% more to buy on the way down.

I suspect there won’t be much volume on the sell side after that interview bit of PR

Indeed Bermuda. Next step is a main LSE listing or a listing in the USA.

We should know which by this time next year.

….mmmm…..

I bought more Scancell today in part because of what happened to another stock I hold yesterday. As a result of another company doing a deal in the same “space” on Monday, the share price literally doubled on Tuesday. Very small and speculative stock of course, but the point is that even news which is not company-specific can move the market quickly.

I also notice that BiotechTV is sponsored by NASDAQ, amongst others, and carries an interview with a VC who pointed out that London listings materially undervalue biotech companies. I would be unsurprised if he broached that topic with Lindy. Soon see……

All good points. Summarises my own view as at yesterday.

But this afternoon I’ve put my money where my mouth is and topped up. Possibly there is a longer line of stock looking for a home, but I’m hoping to see news rather sooner than later.

Scancell remains my “conviction stock” in the portfolio.

Just for interest, I haven’t “waited ten years” and I won’t be “waiting another ten years” either. I invested in 2020, shortly before Redmile, and have a similar average cost (albeit without the convertible carry).

I’m surprised that the market seems to be underwhelmed by the opportunity here…..but have little doubt that can be corrected very quickly indeed.

What would Vulpes say about a share price that is half the share price that, 12 months ago, they called derisory?

What if the reason for lack of news is a bid for the whole company?

What price would Vulpes and Redmile be content to sell at? None of us know. But my guess would be a big multiple of the current share price. An agreed deal at around 60p is not an impossibility, given sector precedent and valuations.

I’d say 20.02 is a bit early to be hitting the bottle - or discussion boards.

Interesting that it closed at 0.15 mid when virtually all the trades in the last hour or so of trading seemed to be centred around 0.14.

Suggests to me that there may be a very big order being worked and that much of the trading late on was mostly about hoovering up stock.

Suggest you check the actual share price rather than confusing people…..🙄

Prospective resources on the licence are 3.5 billion barrels, unrisked……and, net to GBP and fully risked, there are prospective resources of 326 million barrels.

https://www.energy-pedia.com/news/namibia/global-petroleum-announces-increase-in-prospective-resources-estimate-for-the-marula-prospect-in-namibian-licence-pel0094

That is an enormous upside, given the derisory market cap - all they need to a partner to either cut them a decent carry or, alternatively, take the company out completely.

Better to have the licence issued at the point when everything is lined up to go.

So….from the AR&A, these are the approx changes in major holders since last year:

Lombard Odier……sold 30mn

Yorktown……sold 20mn

Radoff…..bought 38mn

Aberforth …..bought 4.5mn

Pharos…..bought 10mn in buyback

The only other change noted was Blue Albacore sold c 300,000 (so 1% of holding)

The other longstanding holders (Continis, Maugein estate, Story etc hold the same as last year.

Guess the main Q is what will happens to Story’s 16.2mn, but there don’t seem to be any other blocks potentially in play.

Noted. I will ensure I spell out future comments very slowly for you.

Meanwhile, please feel free to pick on somebody else for your tedious nitpicking.

They wouldn’t.

I was just making the point that the 90% confidence in reaching 70% is driven by the 85% already having been achieved in one cohort - and noting (without saying as much) that it would be nuts to think they had a 90% chance of beating 85%.

You seem determined to get the wrong end of the stick today……..

Johnny,

It is the fact that 85% is “in the bag” from the initial cohort that drives the 90% probability of exceeding 70% ORR.

If there was a 90% chance of exceeding an 85% ORR then you can be certain that 85% would have been the target ORR, not 70%.

That said, as I pointed out earlier, the 90% number is irrelevant once the results start coming in…..indeed their internal expectations may already be different?