Member Info for inanaco

search my history .... it's like going to a library ...

already done it on SCIb1 ... read the recent history, i am not spending time like you repeating my posts just to make myself heard ...

i

exactly crumbs ........ and the best point of sale is always a phase 2 data profile ...

which is why SCIB2 has a break at phase 2

Modi1 run to a phase 2

SCIB1 run to another phase 2 with keytruda

Phase 2 gives you an indicative efficacy number for a phase 3 ... the bigger the divergence from standard of care the higher the probability of success in a phase 3 ........ so the higher the valuation

and that is what is missing

why no deals ............

because the true value attributed comes from Pr and Cr ... partial response and complete response

you see the adjuvant market has moved on PD-1 becoming the standard of care

so we have to test with it .. or we are testing against it ...

but we have synergy

Ruckrover

it's not me being right ......... its the science developed by Scancell which is proving itself right ...

we all know its has huge value ... and what i have stated .. the CR rate could make your valuations look like loose change

i do understand what the BB is about ...

but you don't have any ideas ? hence i posted

Thing is Ruckrover

these Policy directions that i mentioned at the investor day .. to the BOD of Scancell .. are questions I asked and suggested

have you actually produced any "outside of the box" posts of value ... ? and put them to Scancell

if so which ????

what actually suggestion that you have that folks here could gather consensus around ???

your valuations are poor .. if you want a cut and paste on what you thought the license meant, i can do it .. from the other BB

that got dismissed by a few posters

but might make Ray chuckle ..

this is my post ...... No yours

a succession of License agreements and collaborations developing into a Research Power House funded by potential royalty stream's that would dwarf "Arm Holdings"

what is your post ?

nothing

i thought i was an Irish comedy show ?

I think Lindy has the personality and the IQ to handle most situations ... and most pharma indeed BioNtech are headed by equals rather than corporates

is a product which can be refined further by "clinically linking it to PD-1"

scancell develops to a product ...

SCIB2 is a product ... when then go through all the pre-clinical ... thats regulatory for the product its not refining it further

you posted

My preference has always been an outright purchase of Scancell.

One where Scancell continues as an entity with Lindy's science being fully funded and funding trials is not a problem.

One where Lindy remains a free spirit to go where her science takes her.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lindy does anyway ........ but as a director ... not subservient to a major pharma

which is Brexit ...

Thing is Ruckrover

these Policy directions that i mentioned at the investor day .. to the BOD of Scancell .. are questions I asked and suggested

have you actually produced any "outside of the box" posts of value ... ? and put them to Scancell

if so which ????

indeed why would your valuations be based on "royalties" ..........

shoot your own foot mate !!

If we are not following this develop and license principle

what model are we following ?

I asked David

outright sale

or

a succession of License agreements and collaborations developing into a Research Power House funded by potential royalty stream's that would dwarf "Arm Holdings"

as my 2013 statement at the investor meeting already suggested this model and here we are "in it"

and David Evans is Not in it ...

indeed why would your valuations be based on "royalties" ..........

shoot your own foot mate !!

If we are not following this develop and license principle

what model are we following ?

he is not relevant .......

likewise your posts are not relevant because David Evans never understood the principle .

Arm Holdings designs and develops ... it never looked at the end user market but supplied manufactures with solutions ..

the collaboration agreement .. does exactly that

At the investor day he said ... he was not the right man to carry through an Arm Holdings type scenario

he never rejected it because he already accepted he was not the right man

He has Gone .. and he went out under a cloud as we all know

CRUK deal carries the same out come if run to the end ,