Member Info for emptyend

So….back to EXACTLY what was said. I’ve put the important words in caps for the slow,,,,

"Having considered the Revised Proposal carefully with its Financial Adviser, the board of directors of CyanConnode (the "Board") has confirmed to Esyasoft that the Revised Proposal IS AT A LEVEL that the Board WOULD be willing to recommend unanimously to CyanConnode shareholders."

To be clear, that is NOT a recommendation! No proposal has been made. No terms have been confirmed. There is no potential deal in existence that can be recommended. But price alone would not be a barrier to a unanimous recommendation.

However, they still need to get enough shareholders to accept the bid terms and there may be dealbreaker conditions that would stop the recommendation. Also, as Directors owe a fiduciary duty to shareholders, they may not be able to recommend a bid at that level in the event that another party was prepared to pay more.

The ONLY point at which a bid can be recommended is when it has actually been made, complete with all terms and conditions precedent. And we aren’t at that point yet!

So….back to EXACTLY what was said. I’ve put the important words in caps for the slow,,,,,

“

RE: The

"Having considered the Revised Proposal carefully with its Financial Adviser, the board of directors of CyanConnode (the "Board") has confirmed to Esyasoft that the Revised Proposal IS AT A LEVEL that the Board WOULD be willing to recommend unanimously to CyanConnode shareholders."

To be clear, that is NOT a recommendation! No proposal has been made. No terms have been confirmed. There is no potential deal in existence that can be recommended. But price alone would not be a barrier to a unanimous recommendation.

However, they still need to get enough shareholders to accept the bid terms and there may be dealbreaker conditions that would stop the recommendation. Also, as Directors owe a fiduciary duty to shareholders, they may not be able to recommend a bid at that level in the event that another party was prepared to pay more.

The ONLY point at which a bid can be recommended is when it has actually been made, complete with all terms and conditions precedent. And we aren’t at that point yet!

That categorically says that the BoD would recommend the 10.44p bid, should it be made, unless they are misleading ES.

InTheTin,

I can not only read, but I can also understand the nuances behind the exact words used. You, on the other hand, seem to be a simple-minded idiot. Have another go and read EXACTLY WHAT THEY SAID. 🙄🙄

Far too many people here are pretending they know what is happening. I repeat my point from yesterday:

“People here ....and even worse on ADVFN are pretending that they know what is going on and making all sorts of wild, unsubstantiated and intemperate accusations. You haven't got a clue what is happening or why!!

As I effectively noted in my 00.09 post, there is a process going on in which Eyasoft have been moved ip with the (non-binding) indication of a recommrndation. I have little doubt the board will recommend if/when a firm bid is made - but thst bid will only be made if they think they can get it over the line. At present, the possibility of a new bidder still remains - and that possibility may generate a higher bid than the indicated non-binding 10.44p. Nobody knows. But what they SHOULD have taken on board is that shareholders are unimpressed by 10.44p.....and there is a risk a bid at this price will be insufficirnt to succeed. What if L&T (for example) popped up with a bid at 14p?”

1. There is no firm bid at all as yet

2. There is therefore no bid that can be accepted, so the Board have merely indicated that they would accept if one were made

3. The Board haven’t committed their shares and haven’t recommended the putative bid. But clearly they have put the company in play and will sell to the highest bidder

4. It may well be that Eyasoft proves to be the highest bidder BUT that is by no means a certainty, as there are companies in this space who can not only find £40-50mn to take out Scancell shareholders but can also take out the loans

5. In other words, this is far from a “done deal” - and therefore it is premature to fly off the handle and abuse the Board and Cronin for this or that. It may come to that point, if third parties think Eyasoft is too enmeshed for them to bid, but there is no evidence of that as yet.

The only thing that is clear is that the Board have VOLUNTARILY put the company in play.

Burble,

……wait for the next deal!

A few years ago, when the Genmab deals were done, acceptance of much of Scancell’s science was much less wide than it is now……and it was seem as a “proof of concept” deal for the platform. That platform now has its own sub, Glymab Therapeutics, …….so watch this space, 😉

Not quite, HarleyGreen. They have said they would recommend it IF they made an actual bid. But plainly they would also recommend a higher bid - and I’m suggesting that the market will force Eyasoft to make one. We won’t know until a firm bid is made…..if indeed it is.

People here ....and even worse on ADVFN are pretending that they know what is going on and making all sorts of wild, unsubstantiated and intemperate accusations. You haven't got a clue what is happening or why!!

As I effectively noted in my 00.09 post, there is a process going on in which Eyasoft have been moved ip with the (non-binding) indication of a recommrndation. I have little doubt the board will recommend if/when a firm bid is made - but thst bid will only be made if they think they can get it over the line. At present, the possibility of a new bidder still remains - and that possibility may generate a higher bid than the indicated non-binding 10.44p. Nobody knows. But what they SHOULD have taken on board is that shareholders are unimpressed by 10.44p.....and there is a risk a bid at this price will be insufficirnt to succeed. What if L&T (for example) popped up with a bid at 14p?

There is still plenty to play for - and I hope the board are playing their hand well....

So what? It was correct when I was told that!

It is debateable how valuable new sales are at present, given the existing order backlog....

“ JC has over the years praised CC & its Tech as being World Class”

I know one of the former directors, who has been involved in a large number of early stage tech companies. He told me that CC was the only company he’d been involved with where you didn’t really need to sell the product - customers simply beat a path to your door.

In hindsight the mistake here has been to become too dependent on the biggest customer, so that customer has gained too much leverage. There is certainly a business synergy and it makes sense for the companies to be put together, BUT the issue here is not the combination in principle - it is the price for Cyan shareholders.

I think it will be difficult to get the deal across the line at 10.44p, so I think Eyasoft will end up raising it to something more acceptable to the majority of shareholders. That will still be cheap compared to where the share price has been, but I suspect most shareholders have breakevens under 15p (which was the first price I paid). And remember too that the absolute sums involved are not huge: increasing the bid by enough to gain acceptance would probably cost c.£10mn ish……..but that isn’t huge in the context of getting control and safeguarding the buyer’s own position - and there is some risk, I think, of getting outbid by a third party and losing the control they currently exert over Cyan.

Yes tf, still in LoS for another week and booked direct on TG910….fortunately!

I’m sure the Board indeed have better things to do these days, with multiple live discussions on possible deals - and I completely agree that retail opinion is very far from being important. I have, however, been on the board of a similarly-sized company which spent a long time trying to execute its strategy despite political headwinds….and it was a source of regular amusement to compare a certain poster’s guesses with the real facts, especially for the biggest shareholder.

“ at one time it was implied that there would be an avalanche of Publicity and the banging of drums but we seem to have skipped that. For me, that can only mean, we are so deep in interest and discussions, that it would be a waste of resource at this point.”

Yes I think that isn’t far out. I wouldn’t be surprised if the potential deals have effectively got a longish list of conditions precedent that must be met, such as regulatory approvals etc, and they will be steadily working though that list, announcing RNS-able milestones as they go.

Indeed. That is why it is simply risible for people to obsess about tiny little upticks and downticks in the shareprice (on a day when hundreds of share prices moved up or down by 2/3/4%) - and ascribe motivations for them that are simply clueless. I suspect it must be rather irritating to be on the company’s board and see streams of unhelpful nonsense, when they are working hard towards doing serious deals, as we know from the AGM and subsequent presentations that they are.

As Punter1973 implies, the process of the shareprice being set by the clueless (as hitherto) to it being set by hard cash from asset-buyers is necessarily opaque.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

You think??? 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Are you completely mad? 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

Utter drivel 🙄🙄

My watchlist also has a number of stocks that are up. They produce oil….der! 🙄🙄

“ So what has caused today's drop”

FFS….. even a moron should be able to work out that opportunistic traders will ALWAYS drop the bid if there are developments that affect the wider market but not the company! 🙄🙄. For Gods Sake! 🙄🙄🙄

Now Trump has attacked Iran, along with the Israelis, I suspect we may be days away from the Iranians closing Hormuz. If/when that happens, oil prices may prompt a big reassessment of E&P stocks in general. Seems likely to last at least several weeks?

Jonathan Van Tam makes some interesting points in an article in The Telegraph:

Vaccine sovereignty is not a luxury – it is a national security imperative

……

“ First, we need permanent pandemic standby. A modest but resilient UK-based vaccine manufacturing capacity, kept “warm” across a range of technologies – not just the one that worked last time – so it can scale at speed. The next pandemic may require viral vectors, protein subunits or platforms not yet invented. Insurance against scientific surprise requires breadth, not narrow bets.

Second, we should deepen structured partnerships with trusted allies, including serious consideration of joining the EU’s FAB programme – a network of “ever-warm” manufacturing facilities designed to provide surge capacity across member states. The EU, unlike the UK, has the population scale to sustain full-spectrum capacity at volume. Participation in such a scheme, or the creation of a similar multinational framework, would spread risk, expand access and reduce the chance that Britain is left exposed in a supply crunch.

Third, we must fix the weakest links in our own system. Inventing vaccines is not enough. We need fill-finish facilities to vial them at scale, reliable access to specialist inputs such as lipid nanoparticles, and factories capable of switching platforms quickly. Targeted public investment to close these gaps would crowd in private capital, strengthen our life-sciences base and secure high-skilled jobs – while ensuring we can deliver doses at pace when it truly matters.”

Just on the point of “the market”, I’m not sure the market would necessarily be across the detail of possible bids when the main projects and the potential bidders are all overseas. S. Chari might be, but he is now an insider.

I must say that whoever it was who said that the share price would pause around the then-current price (13.5-13.6p) has turned out to be spot on and I was wrong to disagree. I had thought it would take 15p for enough volume to come out to satisfy demand. Quite well-informed for a rare poster?

None of which matters really……the shares continue to move into firmer hands and the end result won’t change

Burble,

Who cares about the scientific waffling if you may be sitting on a discovery that cures cancer? If a single shot of a moditope vaccine primed the immune system to kill multiple types of cancer, don’t you think a massive patented lead should be protected?

Remember that Lindy said last year at one point “we think we’re there” before immediately toning the claim down.

I’m firmly of the view that there is much more going on than meets the eye right now,