Member Info for inanaco

inanaco

Posted in: SCLP

Posts: 30,242

Price: 7.05

No Opinion

RE: BioNTech02 Jan 2020 22:33
What ... ? bermuda

Its Car T delivered via blood transfer with a Vaccine to boost in vivo numbers of Car T ...

it would be like giving BioNtech modified TCR t cells cultured outside the body re infused and then modi1 vaccine to boost the immune response further of the infused t cells ...

if you had of read what i had written you will see my first response highlights what this proposal by BioNtech relates to Scancell .... TF

TF ... Bermuda is calling folks Liars ! yet you say nothing ...

No problem with the Info Ivy ......... just the description that accompanied it .........

But if you feel Car T can be delivered by a MRNA vaccine ... it rules out ever using TCR as a means to an end ...

Bermuda claiming he is not not an expert and has limited understanding .. then qualifies him self to proclaim everybody else does not have the ability and indeed should be classed as a liar and posts ignored ...

is this what you lot have become .... ??

The other day i picked up on Bermudas claims that Scancell will Screen patients for Enolase and Vermentin ...

as i tried to explain over and over that all patients healthy and with cancer would all score 100% Enolase and Vermentin as they are major building blocks and enzymes in the body .. as such a pointless exercise for screening for Modi1 patients

Scancell have never stated they would screen ...

Anyway ... well written Garbage .. seems to be more acceptable than actual facts ...

Happy New Year ...

The point was you did not understand it ... !!

ATB

What ... ? bermuda

Its Car T delivered via blood transfer with a Vaccine to boost in vivo numbers of Car T ...

it would be like giving BioNtech modified TCR t cells cultured outside the body re infused and then modi1 vaccine to boost the immune response further of the infused t cells ...

Bermuda you posted
2) In the context of my posts, it's irrelevant that SCIB2 needed more work. Scancell themselves were telling us that they were actively seeking to license SCIB2 and did not intend to develop it any further - are you now saying that wasn't true and that they couldn't do a deal on SCIB2 as it wasn't ready?

Scancell did license it

Only looking at the share price in isolation ......... is exactly why Diggles keeps buying .......... !!!

your posts just don't convey any positive signals ...

They don't explain the complexity of firing off a Moditope assault is Switching to Th1 and the reasons behind that ... and all the hurdles lindy has overcome and indeed expanded on in particular the HLA variants ... since .. you have to take every research paper on Moditope to discover how the Jigsaw fits and How lindy has expanded the patent ... since 2013

and Like you said in that Respect Crackin has a Point ....... and like you have said "its Bleeding Obvious" ... so why highlight it ???
who is Crackin ?

hardly worthy of a reply ...

Bermuda
Only SCIB1 was a defined product ... ie clinical ready in 2015

SCIb2 still needed work

Biontech collaboration TCR .. but not the primary vaccine ... ?

Have you thought that Scancell does not want a deal yet on the primary modi1 vaccine ? 2015 to 2019

why would they ? Lindy knows just how good it is ...

The point i am trying to make is this ... your putting "yourself" as the Mind of Pharma and Investors ...

your acting as the Authority ........... certainly promoting that outlook as a fact .... when really its just your humble opinion

Bermuda

You did not answer the question ..........

you are "floating" your ideas out there ....... not sure of the relevance of 2013 at all ?

but you did mention 2015 ....

which is why i asked you what defined products actually existed in 2015 ?

but I also asked


explain this to me Bermuda .

Why would BioNtech get involved only in the very complex TCR of moditope when actually it could have done a deal on the primary vaccine Modi1 > ?

Happy New year all ...........

explain this to me Bermuda .

Why would BioNtech get involved only in the very complex TCR of moditope when actually it could have done a deal on the primary vaccine Modi1 > ?

On this statement

""""There was no appetite from either pharma or fund managers for Scancell's products. Indeed even Vulpes weren't interested in 2015. """"

what defined product(s) was available in 2015 ?

"""" could also be used to increase the potency of any human mAb and is available for licensing."""

that's Scancells words

C7 ....

well because you can "enhance" existing MABs .....

the variables become infinite

now if somebody does Improve Binding on an existing Mab ............ wow !

any party that has a Mab coming off patent could build a Mark 2 version a fresh 20 year patent

the company need to License the "Avidmab" ... based on exclusive or non exclusive ... basis
that could involve an up front fee (your £5m)
then stage payment on trial results
and a royalty on sales

but it could be No fee and end Loaded ... like SCIB2 ... but in this case we do have an option to recover the asset at phase 2

your trying to add so many variables ......... without the data ..

Its not a Battle ...

I just made it simple ............ £5m in adds £5m to Mcap ...

inanaco

Posts: 30,230

Price: 5.25

No Opinion

RE: Volume 295kToday 13:58
C7

a license fee is a one off payment in this industry "a licence to use" ... however for Ichor it was for a period but contained an option this helped with upfront costs ....

so stage payment may be part of the license .... but approved that would then shift to royalty payments if written into the license

however in software TV etc ... its yearly as your also paying for content and updates

Royalties are paid yearly ..

i replied to that as well ....... C7

its not a Tv License

C7 your original post did not include the word

Recurring ....

Tell me Ruck if you can, and this is just one scenario if we were in a position to receive £5m in licence fees for Avidamab by H2 2020 what kind of valuation would that make on our current SP presuming no other funding was necessary and timelines/revised timelines for SCIB1 are met.

that is stage payment

not licence

SCIB2 has a license but no upfront or stage payment only Royalties

i will remind you of the question

""" Tell me Ruck if you can, and this is just one scenario if we were in a position to receive £5m in licence fees for Avidamab by H2 2020 ""

what kind of valuation would that make on our current SP presuming no other funding was necessary and timelines/revised timelines for SCIB1 are met.

Ruck ...

its simple if i give you £5m ... you have £5m ...

you don't have £3m or £10m ... its £5m

so just divide it by the shares in issue gives you a number ....

calculate £5m ? up front ?

divide it by the share base

as that is what has been added to the value of Scancell ...

its what else is in the agreement that you can then look at ...

so just like IMM ... the thought of a win on a future trial has been priced in again ...

C7

a license fee is a one off payment in this industry "a licence to use" ... however for Ichor it was for a period but contained an option this helped with upfront costs ....

so stage payment may be part of the license .... but approved that would then shift to royalty payments if written into the license

however in software TV etc ... its yearly as your also paying for content and updates

Royalties are paid yearly ..