Member Info for Ivyspivey

WTP Thanks for posting and one of good things about setting up in Oxford is the rich pool of talent and suitable applicants available locally

Have not looked but FYI

https://acmedsci.ac.uk/file-download/4747802

Nice to know that Covid Vax trials are going ahead in SA despite current issues

https://t.co/SIdlktJfzg

Hi Miavoce,
As you have pointed out use of a single word can change the tone of a post.
My use of the word “ independent “ is mainly used in connection with the SCIB 1 compelling data which is the one in which the biggest validation has probably been seen.
It is independent data in sense that it is in a regulated trial but it is has not for whatever reason been “ validated” by the people who will value and buy these assets ie big pharma and that is my distinction.
Perhaps I should use another word but I mean validated by someone with the ability to value and monetise it to a suitable level forcSCLP to do a deal

Miavoce you are absolutely correct that it should be “ unvalidated “ and yes the distinction is critical.I do apologise for any misinterpretation of my point.
There has been validation of the Science by the DD carried out by Redmile and Vulpes as well as peer reviewed articles and we all hold Lindy in the highest esteem.
I know that with SCIB 1 we produced “ compelling data”
I refer only to the stated aim of SCLP who have said “ Pharma have ringside seats” and just need to see trial data to validate the SCLP science and then we can truly monetise the platforms that we are developing.
As Trebor highlighted and a large consensus has agreed it is the length of time it is taking to get these platforms/ products into trials to generate this data that some are finding frustrating.

Morning Trevor,
Am pleased you said that and a large number of people agree.It really is very simple.
The Science here is outstanding and game changing news very likely.
However until they generate data via trials the platforms will remain largely independently invalidated.This point has been made on many occasions and repeatedly in person by the BoD so those who agree with Trebors view are simply following the stated intentions of SCLP.
Until they actually get these trials up and running there will always remain an element of doubt given the track record of moving to a later stage drug development Company first mentioned in 2015.

Evening.Fantastic night and worth celebrating.
I simply thanked Kashdog for posting the link and highlighted the reference to p1 to give some insight into when CEPI May support SCLP.
We need that p1 data it really is simple as very unlikely that they will support SCLP or any accompany purely based on mouse data plus SCLP have clear funding via UKRI

Thanks for posting Kashdog.
We need the p1 data

As promising preclinical and Phase I trial COVID-19 S-Trimer vaccine data became available, CEPI expanded the partnership in November, 2020. To date, CEPI’s total investments in Clover’s COVID-19 vaccine is up to $328 million.

Relevant bit

Enabling early diagnosis and treatments, including immune therapies such as cancer vaccines

https://t.co/IA5SHBZbmF

This is a new Govt initiative aimed at Life Sciences including a mission to identify and help develop Cancer Vax

Morning Tardis,
As you have access to the time machine you should be answering the question rather than asking for answers lol

Thanks Dracula,
I often think that one of the issues with digital communication and even BBs is the lack of nuance so you can’t be 70-80% confident which in my book is pretty high and unless you are 90%+ then you must hold the totally opposite view.
Same with politics it would be a surprise to me if every policy/ decision on one side is correct and the opposing party gets everything 100% wring which some portray.
Bit like a football fan who thinks every one of his/ her players should fit into a combined team with a similar standing rival.
It is all about opinions but the team most likely to win is the one picked with informed opinion not seen through a blinkered supporters eyes

Evening All,
Another good post Bermuda to add to Burble’ s excellent efforts earlier on.
As Bermuda says what Burble highlighted today is largely what Inanaco has been very confident in for years. The fact that both have independently come to those conclusions along with others is a testament to being very supportive of SCLP.
To repeat again my position along with others is not that the science is not compelling it is the idea that just because you cannot find a reason in the science to fail then that means there is no or little risk of it failing or alternatively because it works in mice therefore it must automatically work in humans because we can’t think of a reason why it might not.
That is the risk with all of these platforms in that it happens not that we need to explain it in advance.
That is why big pharma has multiple drugs in the pipeline as it just happens that they know some will not make it.
Bit like the advertising adage that we know advertising works on half the population the problem is we don’t know which half.
So the fact SCLP has multiple shots at goal means there is a great likelihood that one or more will hit the back of the net transforming the outlook here.
I do feel likes of AB who has denied being Aim Big about 20 times not that I know who he is anyway makes some valid points but has repeatedly stated he is confident here.
Does seem to be all or nothing in that if you question any aspect of “ no risk” then you are accused of being anti SCLP well the reality is that the likes of me,AB and probably others all want this to do well and are very confident here but we do acknowledge that this is not slam dunk that others seem to get upset if you highlight that fact.
GLA

Thanks for excellent post Burble which I have copied to the other site as I thought it was very worthwhile sharing.
It made an excellent case for investing in SCLP and where we are with the various platforms in an informative, balanced manner

Yep GreenD.
Did not want to put a particular figure as I just don’t don’t want it become a millstone as I see any further substantial investment at these levels by CF as a huge positive.
But agree with you the figure you quote is in the ballpark of what I would like to see.
I have forgotten the exact %age of personal wealth that CF said he put into ORPH 18 months ago but I recall it was at least 25% or maybe more.
So even at a 25% minimum his net worth at the time would be max £8m of which the majority of the remainder say £6m would be tied up and I feel he would have out most of his spare cash intonORPH at the time.
We know he has not taken a huge salary here so apart from selling or leveraging other assets I can’t see him having accumulated a lot of free cash ie multi millions of pounds in the last 18 months and as you say he is putting £500k into Poolbeg and the Raglan investments.

Morning guys,
Think you are much more realistic about size of potential investment by CF.
At the time he put the original £2m or whatever in here it was a large %age of his personal wealth.Yes this has grown but is tied up in here.He has a lot tied up in Amryt and elsewhere cans of course will have a nice house etc.
Any Pension fund is limited to a lifetime allowance so yes his paper wealth has grown enormously but a large bit is tied up.You would not expect any CEO however convinced to sell other committed assets or take on leveraged debt to increase his current exposure of £12m or whatever it is so he is limited in terms of “ free cash”.
Certainly I would take any 7 figure sum as a huge endorsement at these levels bit £5m imo is totally a figure plucked out the air to then convey a measure if disappointment and attempt to turn a huge positive into a negative

Evening- know SCLP are not represented directly but their work may well be covered and you can always ask questions

https://www.uk-cic.org/news/uk-cic-public-webinar-covid-19-vaccines-and-protective-immunity

Hi TF,
Just filtered the guy.
GF possibly but know they had £2.5m cash at hand this month.
Anyway looking forward to news here on multiple fronts

Morning GF,
Thanks for response.Of course all views are allowed and in this instance I and many others are supportive of the BODs position in this matter.No where have I said the BoD are wrong in this instance but everyone should reserve the right to disagree or agree on any issue without being labelled as being “ bitter “ or having some type of hidden agenda.
A holding of 6m -7m is of considerable size and I will leave it up to others to decide it’s significance.I appreciate that if that size of holding is entirely in SCLP then it is not out of the ordinary in P/F size and equally is not “ massive” to those individuals like DE and his peers who have extensive investments beyond SCLP

Morning Spre,
Interesting discussion about DE motives but personally I just accept them for what he stated and having met him I think he is a principled and transparent guy who disagreed with the BoD on a particular point of Corporate Governance and disclosure and has decided to sell his holding in an orderly manner.
Yes this may represent a culmination of further erosion of his trust in the BoD and yes I feel it odd that he may want to break this news on a public board but how anyone can extrapolate further rationale or attempt to discredit him is ill informed and unnecessary.
He is a very successful,knowledgeable and insightful bio tech investor like the Diggles so why is one deemed better than the other just because one is buying and one is selling SCLP.
In fact I recall similar arguments when Vulpes were opposing the BoD against the additional RM investment so how the selective favouritism and choice of zero to hero is right moves on.
I do believe DE has a holding of about 6-7m so will leave others to decide how “ massive” or otherwise this is.
My main point is just to accept that others may have a different perspective or POV, there is no agenda but am sure I will get accused of having a go at various folk but really want people to have the right to state an alternative view like DE or anyone without being falsely accused of having an agenda.
I value DEs insight and would add that he not only has a contact with the BoD but certainly has discussions with even larger SH than himself so his position may not always be as isolated as some on here indicate.
BW