Member Info for Ivyspivey

Hi Bermuda

You are correct that Jeffries give a personal invite to the Waldorf and you can’t get in otherwise but yep most of movers and shakers will be there.Unlss SCLP confirm attendance is hard to find out

Evening Alma’s a very good summary of tonight’s presentation.

The question you refer to and had additional Richard Shaw input was mine and very happy with response.

By coincidence I passed by Clatterbridge today

Not asking anyone to agree but as the combined market cap of the Company’s CT has said SCLP will likely destroy is in excess of $300bn then is he suggesting that in time the market cap here will reach that level.

Happy to have a balanced debate with anyone who supports that view as posing that question on the other side just gets a response of personal abuse.

For the record like Ruck I am bullish here just hopefully trying to be realistic in expectations.

MorningAB,

The issue of the decimal point being in wrong place has happened on at least 7 or 8 other shares I am aware of so as you say a market glitch.

Still a decent sized trade though and good to see a Friday tick up.

HAGW

Hi Violin Dog,

Not surprising but has nothing to do with the potential attractiveness of SCLP Science.

Most of these deals are facilitated and planned literally years in advance and form part of the pharma 5-10 year Plan.

They rarely tend to be opportunistic based on however good clinical results.

Agree Matt I think it will be a rehash of existing results but would love to be wrong.

Do think it is looking more likely that AGM will be more revealing.

Do we know if SCLP are going to WVC Europe

Evening I know LD is listed as a speaker and has been for about 6 months when she was also listed on the agenda as the Speaker.The last 3 agenda updates have listed Sam Paston as presenting but at different times.

I believe LD still being listed a speaker is a mistake unless someone can find her speaking on the agenda..

Happy to be corrected but I can’t find her slot

Hi EE,

Presumably it is pretty normal to have a BoD meeting at time of AGM particularly if some are overseas based.

Just assuming they have about 4-6 meetings a year then does make sense to me to at least discuss and in essence agree a way forward presumably based on results whilst everyone is together

Hi EE,

Think it is the Accounts that largely determine timing but it would be very opportune for the BoD to discuss next steps and for that they would imo need to know trial results

Yep EE,

LD is still on the list of speakers but the time has changed for the presentation and it is down for Samantha Paston to give the talk.

That is according to the agenda listed in the invitation I received today but really wanted to know if anyone else had any more info.

Hi can anyone confirm whether the presentation time has changed from 5.30 to 5.10pm and it is Samantha Paston giving the presentation.TIA

Evening that is what I do not understand.I have said I am a thick bloke which you concur but you and Nana are both frightened to attend an AGM or some other environment where we can debate and actually prove who is telling the truth adjudicated by sone neutral authority we can both agree on.

I can only come to the conclusion you are both bottlers and chokers and midnight jokers.I am even prepared to put up with your Willy waving which I know you can’t resist unless of course you really are being economical with the truth.

As you love cricket analogies so much it really is not cricket not to settle your bets.Have a nice evening

Burble or Recce.

Would love your thoughts on the below extract

“And in 10 years, Scancell may well have figured out how to give everyone a preventative shot that stops nearly all cancerous “

Ratty if you are calling me out then happy to see you in court or at an AGM and we can ask RG together.You can even bring along some copies of your book to sell as you must have quite a few left.

GF you flatter yourself if you think I would gas light you as you are well and truly up your own.

If you don’t want the truth just filter me or sue me if you have the balls

Ray where have I said pharma is not interested in SCLP Science where relevant.I am just saying that big pharma are like Supertankers with a planned route they seek to navigate and it requires an awful lot to get them to change direction just on compelling trial results.

I am trying to explain how the industry works and welcome input from any others who have industry experience but I can assure you their perspective is different from retail investors.

GF if you consider the views of someone like RG are irrelevant then you really need a reality check as you seem to have invested around £1.25m in a Company where you doubt the relevance of what one of the founders views ( plus probably knows as much about the likely interest here as anyone on the planet and certainly a heck of a lot more than anyone of these boards).

You are obviously very comfortable with that exposure here but personally I would prefer to rely on my own DD rather than just follow the BB inputs.

It was RG that told me that big Pharma would very unlikely to understand Moditope enough to want to buy the platform so please take any issues up with him.

Of course the Scientists fully understand the Science and the commercial deal makers would u nderstand how it works but in any type of deal they have to feel “ safe and comfortable “ and as I said RG told me specifically and he had had various conversations on the subject with interested parties and he thought it would only be the likes of Bion Tech( though he did not name them specifically) as you would expect where the Scientists own and run the outfit that would do a deal as they would be the ones to truly understand the potential.

I am going back about 4-5 years but still believe the same situation prevails.

Will comment more fully to Violin dog later but will make one response now.

Big pharma will have quite detailed 5 and 10 year plans in place so the idea that somehow they have not already decided to plan and deal with any patent cliff ( which has been an issue for 20 years) is nonsensical.

The pharma I work for has done 2/3 billion £ oncology deals in last few years and is nit the biggest but probably one of most agile.It has a clear plan to 2035 so they will have decided what areas to pursue and focus on and will have probably made “ partnership” moves years in advance.

So if one of SClP platforms fitted in with the strategic plan and this will apply to virtual all pharma then fine but they will not want to take on board other platforms however promising if it does nit fit their planned narrative

EE that is correct but that is not how big pharma works.

There are several reasons why they may buy a Company but strategic fit is critical.

The buyer of Immunobody if it happens is likely to be a big pharma as they understand it and on right results they will probably take the risk.

Moditope will not be properly understood by big pharma so very unlikely to be on their buying radar but someone like Bion Tech could be a possibility( RG confirmed this to me).

What would happen to the Glycans-I belief the original plan was to spin those off as they are non core again they are unlikely to be part of a big pharma strategic fit and big pharma rather than buy the lot and then spin off things prefer just to do a deal on the bits they want.

Throw in the inherent caution of the big pharma deal makers with the odd exception then you get a much better perspective

Morning whilst there may be considerable interest in individual platforms I am pretty confident there will not be a single deal for the whole Company.Having talked to RG in the past on this very subject the differences between Immunobody and Moditope fully support this view.

The addition of the Glycans simply complicates this process and whilst all add incremental value in their own right they really complicate the prospects of any single deal imo.

.

Morning and agree EE- much more likely imo.

GF- ramp away to your hearts content as none of us will influence the outcome here.

But the worms as you call them have never changed we have all been very consistent that we expect a very positive return here but we just try and manage expectations and know you feel very threatened when anyone questions £8 a share.

I do find it strange as if this hits £1 a share which I agree could easily happen you would have over £7m but you are holding out for £56m .Some May call you a tad greedy but no matter do ramp away as all of us SH will do very well t even those with far more modest holdings.

Yes I know you will Willy w@ve but you always preferred to be a big fish in a small pond and the likes of me and Ruck will simply move on with our gains safe in the knowledge we can enjoy a very nice tickle but equally not worry if by some miracle it fails to achieve your expectations.

So win win for us and thanks for helping us trouser sone winnings

Evening GF why would I be frightened to debate with Nana when I deal with real Professors of Oncology and Vaccinology as part of my job rather than wannabes.

I judge you as someone who reneged on a £100 bet which you clearly lost ( in fairness Nana and me always paid up) and perhaps you are feeling the pressure a bit after the last few days.

I may just be some thick bloke but happy to debate you and/ or Nana in any open public forum mind you he refused the last time as you both like to be keyboard warriors.

ATB