Member Info for Ivyspivey

Afternoon C7 I humbly suggest you actually read my posts rather than just repeating your established pre conceived nice as.
My only mention of LTHs,of which I am one, was that I can understand how they get frustrated after 7 years , at the lack of tangible progress towards what the BoD have repeatedly said is their single most strategic objective.How is that having a dig at LTH?
I praise the efforts over the last 7 years towards progressing and expanding the science and building the IP and thought the achievement of getting Vulpes and RM on board was a huge achievement but all that seems to be forgotten about because I level imo fully justified criticism of the BoD in very specific terms of trial progress,generating data and monetising assets over the last 7 years.
Just agree to disagree but any hint of any criticism of the BoD is immediately seized upon by some as being totally negative which to me means they need too acquire more perspective and have a much more balanced view.

,

Agree Ruck,
No one is arguing about the fact SCLP is very well funded to complete the planned trial work and as you say TF was adroit in omitting some of the stated SP figures from an otherwise reasonable post.
Again no one is arguing about the advancements in developing the science,building the IP protection and enhancing the potential of the platforms.
But what does seem an inescapable fact is the historical slow progress of SCLP to progress this science in regulatory trials, produce robust data and then to monetise the assets.This priority has been repeatedly emphasised by the BoD as being their single most important focus.
Therefore. I can’t blame any LTH getting frustrated by the last 7 years as that timescale is a very long one.
I repeat SCLP has made big progress in many areas but progressing drugs through the trial process is not one of them even though some on here seem totally in wiling to even want to debate it in a balanced way by suggesting 7 years is not a long time in which to have made relatively little progress

Morning Dracula,
The development of the Covid Vax was unprecedented and subject to huge Govt support and advanced contracts etc.
However the Oxford one was based on existing technology the ChAd viral vector and started with a phone call with AZN.
Equally Bion Tech and Pfizer relied on very close co operation and the mRNA technology whilst new to virus’s is relatively quick to develop once they had the full Covid code.
The flu Vax are simply altered each year based on predictive prevailing strains.
You need a huge set up for Vax the manufacturing etc hence likes of SCLP without a partner will always struggle to get things done quickly butbthatviscthe nature of small bios develop the science,monetise and move on

Morning AB,
Good to see Rats admit that his original understanding was wrong and even though he caveated it by “ the impression of confidence” I am happy to point out that this was gained by attending every AGM/ Investor event over a 5 year period and talking to the BoD etc.something the average punter does not do.Plus no different to what I have and many others have done with SCLP events.
He makes a good point about no matter how confident you can be there is still risk and that is why like you I get surprised when balanced posts highlighting both the rewards and risks seem to attract such an unwelcome response from certain quarters.
I do think C11 makes a fair point about we should all be aware that we can lose all of our money on any AIM share not only bio and of course having experience of investing in a wider basket of AIM shares not only spreads the risk but gives you a much wider perspective than the biggest risk of all imo of investing all your money in one AIM share no matter how confident you may be.At least if you are prepared to lose it all then fine but I am aware of many tragic stories of people who have been ruined due to overextending themselves
In one share,especially if they don’t fully understand the risks.
It is a sign of a healthy board where people debate all sides of the argument and I can see AB that is what you want to promote.
Anyway nice weather to enjoy.

You clearly were referring to me and as you linked that insinuation to a direct lie did you honestly think I could ignore a crass attempt at character assassination.
So knowing I lost a lot of money what is “ getting his pants pulled down as divine retribution” all about if you don’t get some sort of warped pleasure at others misfortune.
Again please show me where I have posted on other boards extolling another share or knocking something I am not happy invested in but if you want to see examples of that you can always look much closer to home.

For the uninitiated Ratty is having a clear go at me but why let the facts get in the way of his opinion.
If you did any research at all you can easily check Linked In and look at mine and the CEOs profiles and you will clearly see we are connected and worked for a number of years together at Merck in the same Division so any insinuation that I was making up some sort of close connection is patent nonsense.
Yes I was confident there and knew the Company backwards and had a big investment there and yes a completely unexpected CRL arrived which no one predicted and Bermuda will back me up if you don’t believe me.
So yes I lost a lot of money which if you want to be happy about then fine as I think it says a lot more about you than me as I actually do not like to see people lose money but I accept it as a necessary part of investing on AIM.In exactly the same way as you can often make it all back and more if you are prepared to learn from the experience and invest in other AIM shares.
Please provide any evidence that I posted on other boards “ ramping on other bios” and if you want to develop this argument then you are on thin ice.
So Ratty I have been reasonable today but you have decided to make it personal in your sly manner with your little digs. If that is the way you want to go then fine as I certainly am happy to debate with you until the cows come home but I will apologise to the board in advance for the inevitable toxic and unwelcome arguments that will follow but at least we can all be clear as to who initiated the situation.
So Ratty at least have the guts to not hide behind insinuation and just name me and for once act like a man and not some sneaky kid who gets pleasure out of others loss and pretends to think they are are funny when we mostly know your true motives.

Hi Kashdog,
Don’t disagree with your general point but I do feel that there are people on any share board who may have a considerable investment who simply don’t understand the Company they are invested in or are too lazy to do the necessary research.
It is these people that may be influenced to buy/sell if a well constructed but maybe misleading/ exaggerated argument is posted.
However when a simple one liner with an SP figure or non suppported argument is put then I have no sympathy for anyone that makes decisions on those basis.

WTP,
I don’t know Crackin at all and maybe he/ she likes to create a bit of mischief but no one should be paying any attention to any one simply stating an SP without any corroboration. It won’t make any difference to the SP here which will be determined by news/ sentiment.
Genuine rampers/ de rampers and I mean people who post misleading or exaggerated info either good or bad are pretty easy to see if you have done your research on any share.
Fortunately I think you do have very knowledgable posters on LSE who as LTH we mainly trust as being balanced and informative and I know I really look forward to seeing their contribution

Morning genuine question does anyone seriously believe that quoting an extremely low or high price without any backing up or evidence is an eg of deramping or ramping.
Surely anyone invested here is going to treat all such posts as irrelevant noise and has done enough of their own research to formulate an approximate idea as to what represents value so why would anyone believe anything plucked out the air good or bad.

Morning yes Burble an excellent post and you highlight many of the nuances which will form part of any valuation process and many more could be added to that list and of course the value of these nuances will vary according to who is interested about in monetising the asset.
You need many of these things like IP protection.cost of goods etc but at the end of the day I do believe and this was often stated by SCLP in the past as the clear evidence pathway to monetisation it is about the data.
Without very positive data many of these nuances are immaterial and yes some value will be retained but to me it is virtually all about the data in determining the value here.
Yes the IP protection etc could add big amounts to any deal and add incremental value but the data is the pre determinant of the monetisation value imo.

Hi C7.
I would not like to try and and put a figure on it as it depends totally on how positive the data is from the multiple shots at goal. But assuming one of Glycans does a good deal and one of either Covidity/ Moditope/SCIB1 Combo produces very good results the I believe we could easily get to the 50-60p range. If results are outstanding especially with Modi then could easily go a lot higher.
As with anything there will be checks and balances so firstly not all data will likely be outstanding and don’t forget having very good data may simply not be enough.
The current Covid Vax and others in development will not be easy to displace as they are pretty good and established.
We have seen how great SCIB 1 data in past does not guarantee a deal.
Do we really believe SCLP will exist long enough to develop all these platforms and their likely follow on products.They will be taken out as the BoD will easily sell their stakes long before the 10 plus years it will take to fully develop these.
RM will imo leave in 2025 and once the CONs convert and they largely control the future here.
The BoD are well in their 60s and again won’t want to hold onto shares for more than 5 years imo.
The way a SP moves is in response to the news pipeline so if it is a series of consecutive positive bits then great but if the first bit of data is not positive enough/ inconclusive that will reverse the SP we simply don’t know.
I am happy with SP predictions rather than MC as Bermuda prefers as that is the exit trigger or target figure for PIs.

Well said Bermuda which is one of reasons why the TD reports are so valuable imo. Yes they don’t reach the heights of what many people expect or want but at least they apply a logical valuation process and whilst there are big caveats which some of their assumptions make they are far more accurate than plucking figures from the sky.
I must admit I am not here for a 100 or 1000 bagger as those very rare examples have that sort of rise from a very risky starting position.
Does anyone seriously believe that a relatively medium risk play due to multiple shots on goal is going to generate that sort of reward.
Don’t get me wrong I do believe there will be a healthy return here but we need a lot of perspective here.
Of the science here was considered by big pharma to be so valuable they would have done deals already imo and SCLP will not take these products through p3 etc.
RM will be very happy with a 5-10x return on their investment and certainly won’t be holding out for the types of returns expressed by some.
GLA

We had our arguments a few years ago on another board but hopefully constructed in a non personal way.
But extremely sorry to hear about your current circumstances and wish you all the best whatever that may entail.
Well done for doing well on here but sounds like you have much more important matters to deal with so as said before wish you well and any suggestion you have been anything other than a well respected,informative poster on here is nonsense.

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.

TF thanks for posting and same article was out in Guardian the day before.

Cheksea it is me that needs a drink as it was not intentional ??

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