Member Info for Ivyspivey

Same as Proactive one apart from maybe just highlighting collaborative approach of FDA.
Bodes well for Approval if they can get their questions answered before Approval decision.
May not need AdComm

See the Comedians are about with the Friday Funnies.Think we need a sense of humour in here.
Important science conference and getting up to date picture of field strains and also the diabetic paper may give an indication of one of approaches to positioning of Iclaprim so for moderate renal impairment with co morbidities like diabetes to e land potential target market

Hope you are well.
You understand these things better than me.
Do you think they kept the spread wide today so that the 200k trade from yesterday could be put through at mid point even though looks a clear sell to me.

Yes the daily totals correspond at 4737105 at 1630 but this was shown afterwards.
Perhaps it just disappeared but possibly related more to AMP and see if more TR1s

Single trade of 7470000 via Peel at 1652
Can’t oost twitter photo

7.474m trade via Peel was on a screenshot posted in the Twitter group at 1653.
Can’t see it on LSE but all part of mystery mix going on behind the scenes here.
Anyone else sen it

Yes small trader very much my line of thinking and just to back you up.
MTFB will need to start recruiting MILs very soon and then Account Mangers etc in Q1/19;before Approval decision.
They also need to decide on HABP Trial.
We also know they are finalising the US partner option discussions and that the NDA acceptance was the final catalyst before this could take place.
The repeated preference towards an already Revenue Generating Company in the Hospital space is a stand out for me as well as the possibility of a global deal which again will need to be considered prior to Approval.
We know they have direct access to any interested big pharma Partners and the decisions they take now willmoffer big clues imo to the likely way forward.
As I have said previously Approval is the final decision and I remain extremely confident here even more so after the NDA aceotance but the NDA decision will be the catalyst for the commercial decisions which need to be made before aapproval

Thanks WF,
The future will reveal all and I totally hope the confidence is justified for all of us and for mankind.
Me and Boom can fight our own battles and only back each other up if we agree and not simply to support each other for its own sake.
I will finish it now but anyone who thinks me or suspect many other posters do not put purely their own views forward then they patently fail to understand what we are about.

Boom can answer the point you raised st him being the expert on all matters SCLP.
You may accuse of simply supporting him but only because I consider him to be a very balanced and yes informed poster.
Equally I feel you are very knowledgable but really don’t think it is important or in Booms agenda to try and score points in any contest to be seen to be the SCLP expert

For the record I have a decent sized holding here and am very confident of the level of risk compared to the potential reward and is my 2nd biggest holding and one in which I have added at the current lows.
So for anyone looking to enter here I personally consider it a great investment and advise you look st it further but please do your own research and make your own decision.
I do appreciate your scientific knowledge on here far superior to my understanding.
It is your acceptance that there is no risk here that I struggle with and am sure that all investors on AIM in particular appreciate a balanced viewpoint.
Thanks for the GL message in my investments and know when this one comes good we can both smile together

Morning Inanaco
At £50m market cap I and I suspect many others think the risk/reward is very attractive.
However and the concept you seem to struggle with is accepting that there is no risk here whatsoever just because we can’t point out from a science point of view irrefutable evidence of what can cause the trials to not achieve the end points
As Boom very eloquently pointed out not even the greatest scientists in this field claim to know everything about how individual patients respond to various treatments and therefore no certainty can be applied to any treatment SCLP or otherwise in achieving their clinical end points unless it has proven it in the relevant trials.
Advancing along the clinical pathway reduces the risk as everyone on pharma understands.
If it has not advanced far along this pathway then the risk is increased

See RNS dated 9th August
Dud it last year.Low key event in the Hamptons

http://www.lse.co.uk/share-regulatory-news.asp?shareprice=MTFB&ArticleCode=7g18o8xu&ArticleHeadline=Investor_Events_in_August_and_September

Interesting Itsg-Presume Reuters is source

New Corporate Presentation in time for Trout day today.
Mentions NDA acceptance and extended patents

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9Njk4OTA4fENoaWxkSUQ9NDEwMzI5fFR5cGU9MQ==&t=1

Probably not worth debating as we fundamentally disagree of the premise of risk.
Same way as magic works.Just because I can’t work out how a trick like a disappearing man /sawing someone in half is an illusion does not mean it is not.If it was not an illusion it wou,d be real and that is obviously not the case.
As Boom says it does not matter whether we can quantify why it may not work if it does not work and that is the risk then it will be deemed unsuccessful if it does not meet its endpoints.
Anyway good to discuss these things and I do remain very confident here but we have to acknowledge that there is sone risk.
ATB

Fully understand your logic Inanaco but if the SCIB 1 Combo did not demonstrate a statsistically significant improvement over the Keytruda montherapy then the SP would be hit hard.
To get true value of SCIB 1 or other SCIB products you would need to demonstrate safety and efficacy in either a much larger melanoma cohort or for other indications

Ray P.
Obviously the value of anything is what someone is prepared to pay and yes there have been many deals at very high prices.
However the simple fact is that no one has made an offer to pay for any SCLP platform therefore you cannot use peer valuation as it is so difficult to value different sciences and anyway it is irrelevant if someone dies not make an offer

Inanaco
Thanks for reminding me.
The current low SP means that the downside risk is limited.
In line with what RG states a couple of years ago the value of Immunibidy(essentially SCIB1) was 9x the value of Moditope.That essentially was a reflection of the risk.
Since then we know a more about The 2 platforms but essentially we SCLP have not done the trials to be negate the next stage of risk ie Moditope is still pre clinical and SCUB 1 is still at p2 stage.

Sorry smsc
Saw you posted it on ADVFN so thanks fir that

From ADVFN:

https://uk-investor.com/2018/08/15/is-now-the-time-to-buy-motif-bio-plc-lon-mtfb-after-the-fdas-acceptance-of-iclaprims-new-drug-application/

Yes thanks for best wishes.Yes a sobering afternoon.
Some good posts here and in fairness on ADVFN giving a different point of view from that generally posted here and suggest anyone who wants to see both sides of the debate can get a better insight as long as they ignore the obvious personal stuff.
We all have a lot more in common than we sometimes consider so we all want a better armoury in the fight vs cancer and we mainly want the SP to rise considerably in the long term to give us a good return on our investment.
Imo it is good to have balanced arguments as no non revenue producing bio has little risk.
Think we all recognise the great potential on here but do need to consider the perspective if risk.
It is considerably reduced due having multiple platforms Imunobody/Moditope and the ongoing work on TCR.
The compelling data already generated by SCIB 1 and the infamous swimmer chart is another real plus in reducing the risk moving forward.
We must still recognise that however great the science phase 2 trials in pharma terms still carry a reasonable level of risk and pre clinical data in Moditope is high risk.
We have to accept that level of risk and yes the collaborations with CRUK and BionTech Tech are great validations but largely concerned with funding of future platform developments as is the Grand Challenge.
The 2 crucial bits of news tequired to optimise the future or even if one came would be transformational are
1.SCIB 1 Combo demonstrates a statistical improvement in response rate over and above the PD1 montherapy and 2.Moditope demonstrates some safety and efficacy clinical data.
We wil know this in time but until we know the answers to these questions the degree of risk will still be there.
ATB