Hi TF,
As CW says we are much further ahead but shows variety of approaches being tried and targeting the S2 protein is an interesting angle.It may be much more conserved than the S1 which is not surprising and there is a long way to go and most of immune response has been via nABs.
The SCLP approach is an extrapolation of this approach by targeting in addition the N part of virus and looking to establish a Celll Mediated as well as humoral response.
Others like Vaxart are trying a similar approach as SCLP but we are in a really good position but we need those results and if positive then I am sure the publicity will appear.
Hi Cleaner world according to the U.K. Govt as tweeted by Bion Tech it was yesterday.
I can’t be categoric it was not Rick but why would he be in the photo as it was the Bion Tech team and they would not get or need Innovate funding.
Plus I am certain most people would post a photo involving Boris in any official capacity which he did not.
Chelsea I am no fan of Boris but he is in a difficult position trying to be prime ministerial when he can’t get too involved.
He is not known for his shyness at being in the spotlight and the Covid Vax story is one that he is closely linked with so a better self publicity angle than hiding in a fridge.lol.
Hi Cleaner World,
I would not read too much into the Bojo meeting with Bion Tech today in relation to SCLP as just think it was a photo op for all parties without much serious discussion.
I do agree the guy looks like Rick Holland but ask yourself why would he be in the photo plus as you said he is Innovate NW nowhere near any of SCLP operations.
If you look at his Twitter feed yesterday he was in Liverpool and Manchester with boss of Innovate with no coverage or mention of photo with Boris which I am pretty sure he would have put on his Twitter feed.
Yes there is much interest in Universal Covid Vax and SCLP has an excellent potential one but there are many others.
I really feel if an article mentions SCLP in it then that is great but would just be wary of extrapolating too much when SCLP is not mentioned and somehow thinking it may increase interest here.
We need data and news and when that comes we will know a lot more.
GL
No worries C7,
I just like to deal with things and move on if I can and in my case there is no relevance to anything oncology or Covid related so no real relevance here which of course is in contrast to your own situation which can give an insight into what patients may experience.
Thanks Ruck for BW,
C7- would rather just keep it private and I only mentioned it as it gave me a reasonable insight as to current staffing issues within NHS as I passed through the system from A and E,to the wards and follow up care.
Hoping for a good week
Thanks C7,
Nothing as serious as your own situation but spent a total of 20 days covering 3 different visits and so different from my one and only prior NHS stay 30 years previously.
But yep recovering fine if slow.
BW
Hi C7,
Must admit had not noticed the 700k black trade so that definitely has increased the volume to a much higher level than normal so that us more interesting.
So next few days could be very interesting especially if we hit news.
Glad your hospital trip went well and agree with your comments re nurses/ doctors.
Part of my time absent from the board was spent in hospital where I noticed exactly the same as yourself.
Evening interesting discussion.
I do find it hard in todays bear market that the MMs will hold large stocks of any share but especially relatively low liquidity ones like SCLP.
Equally if they had a known supply they would simply have done a combination of gently increasing the bid to encourage small but steady buying but then dropping the bid to clear the bigger buys if they needed to.
So looking at the size of the trades I concur with others that they are not significant in terms of moving the SP hence see it as a pretty normal days trading on AIM though agree taking in combination with last weeks movement that it it sets up a very positive outlook for when news arrives.
Would depend on who the partner was and whether they would be sufficiently interested in the oncology platform. I suspect the “ Immunobody being sold off as an entire platform’ is not likely
as the Covidity data will likely be out first and you complicate by saying to any prospective partner well can you wait until the SCIB 1/Combo data is ready.
The Covid Vax was always not part of the strategic core of the business so I would expect any partner deal done then SCLP would be happy to let them take on the lions share of the work moving forward and then see what interest lies in its more general infectious diseases application.
Morning Bojo,
We have the funding to complete phase 1 which with the expanded patient numbers and assuming positive results should be enough data to convince a partner to take it forward.
That was always the plan and SCLP will not fund Covid Vax without a partner.
So with the Innovate grant and current cash it should not take much out of SCLP resources to fund and none of other programmes will be affected.
Hi Chester,
That thought had occurred to me and sure their must be provision in the agreement for that event and notice they do refer to takeover possibility in the detail.
Equally say if SCLP find a buyer for Immunobody or even simpler do a very good Glycan deal so they pay RM off in cash for the CLNs rather than shares and say the SP stays at say 15-16p.
That is a very big risk for RM in that scenario for very little reward as for all their CLN amount they get 3% interest which is neither here nor there and if the cash paid was either at 13p or prevailing SP it hardly generates the type of return an extremely professional and experienced healthcare fund would be looking for after risking so much money.
From original RNS
On the Redemption Date, the New Convertible Loan Notes are convertible into Ordinary Shares at a conversion price of 13 pence per Ordinary Share, at the election of the noteholders. This conversion price is subject to customary adjustments, further details of which will be set out in the Circular. Conversion is also subject to any Takeover Code restrictions that may apply at the time of such conversion. No conversion can occur prior to the Redemption Date, save for in the event of a takeover offer being made to shareholders of the Company or upon a Nasdaq listing;
Hi Chester,
From the initial RNS it was clear that the CLNs will revert to shares rather than any option for SCLP to pay them off in cash at redemption date.I would imagine that any attempt to pay cash would be covered by RM having the option of receiving shares instead and if they paid cash at what price would it be as I just can’t see RM agreeing to any deal that involved a vague future price and they held the ship hand at the time.
As RM also agreed to extend the CLNs they have to imo have the option of being paid in shares
Hi. Bermuda,
Absolutely we should not forget the concerns raised by certain big SH about the original 2022 CLN redemption date and they have been proven correct to have done so.So yes very good news when they were extended and your point re CH in bringing RM through is very valid.
We are in a much better position now and we look forward to some great news in the coming weeks
Will sign up for a poetry course.
Recovering from a routine op but doing fine and all good with me.
Hi Coggy,
Trying to improve Mapps poetic effort.
I knew a friendly poster,one of the best,
Always pearls of wisdom even on the nest,
We all invested in FRR and tried to Ramp it,
Sadly it turned we did not become Jed Clampit,
Now we have lost our shirts ,we are sat here in our vest.
Hope all is good everyone.
Hi Chester/ Violin Dog,
The awful market at the moment means we are where are are and even pharma like MXC which this morning released very good news had a very nice rise due to traders but fell back a lot due to market nervousness.
Chester we do differ in terms of trial protocol changes as normally they are submitted by the sponsor so SCLP who may have an insight into how it may improve results but the trial regulators would not play any part on the changes as they are totally independent and would not seek to provide any “ endorsement “ or otherwise.
Also frankly they are not bothered about the outcome and they simply seek to ensure any trial protocol changes are valid and don’t infringe the integrity of the results.
I believe that SCLP decided to change things on balance of probability rather than any regulatory body also the decision to use Pharmajet fir SCIB 1 would have been made imo before the Covid Vax results as they would need time to pass any regulatory hurdles and sort out commercial arrangements with not only Pharmajet but Ichor as well.
ATB