Member Info for KonarA

.. ever present!

There is also an additional US patent number (i am assuming covering one of the sub patents, as it is linked to the main patent) but it hasn't yet been published, so the details are unclear.

The patent in South Africa has been awarded.

Also, documents available online suggest that we are still waiting for the award of the Japan and China patents, but i noticed this line on slide 26 of the AGM presentation:

"Patent awarded in Europe, Japan, China, Australia; still being pursued in US but attorney confident we will get broad claims".

On the AGM recording, i believe Lindy said something along the lines of "the relationship with Biontech is very strong and the first phase has completed and now moving on to phase two". When i heard that, i did wonder what these phases were, as they hadn't been mentioned before.

@inanaco and with that exact thought in mind.. how can you be happy with the price they raised cash?

@ray not for me. I'd like to get above water before the serious news comes. A nice sustained rise will be good for me.

@inanaco perhaps that's where they are going wrong then.

The general disgruntlement for the current share price was. I'd like to think the board reflected on what more they could do.

at the AGM, they will push out a good news RNS tomorrow. Even if it is just a take stock of the positives, or better still the US patent announcement. Anything to consolidate and reinforce today's rise.

I'll call each post on its individiual merits - so worth saying - post rec on a number of them this morning. One thing you and I will never disagree on is the potential of Scancell, and its possible value.

However,i would say that I don't believe Scancell's patent position would be the cause of delay to the GC announcements. The announcements would be "this team has one, and this is what they plan to do" rather than "this team is one, and here is what they have already discovered". I don't see how the announcements would pose any risk to the patent safety.

https://www.sharecare.com/health/immune-lymphatic-system-health/what-clonal-expansion

just referencing that for you.

Douve - the thing to remember, is that the BioNtech research is:

A - Not something we can do alone
B - Seperate from our two main platforms
C - Does not devalue our two main platforms (if anything it validates moditope principles)
D - Could bring in a decent chunk of upfront money that could be spent validating the two main platforms.
E - Does not prevent us doing a deal with any other pharma on the two main platforms.

Remember that $24 billion is across all indications. SCIB1 is only for use in Malignant Melanoma.

It was interesting to note that Lindy's response around use of the moditope platform for Auto Immune Disorders. She said (and i paraphrase here) "that is what karolinska are looking at with RA (rheumatoid arthritis)". So whilst we may not have patented it or plan to monetize it, it is clearly still being explored.

Its also why i think Stress Induced Post Translational Modifications will one day win Lindy a Nobel ;-)

Thanks to steve for bringing us the recording. My views FWIW:

The BoD put up a generally strong performance and are clearly very positive about the strength of the underlying science. Whilst the focus in the near term is on the SCIB1 trial, it is clear they view Moditope as the jewel in the crown (for good reason too).

Whilst Sally Adams spoke very well about the amount of work that they needed to do in order to progress the trail regulation, I have one large outstanding issue that was not addressed. Yes there is a lot of regulation and paperwork. Yes they are a small team that doesn't have the resource to draw on that big pharma does. And yes they are extremely efficient in getting all this done in the time frame they have, whilst still churning out incredible science... BUT, all of these were knowns from the outset, or at least should have been. Yet the trial was scheduled to start in over 2 years ago, and at every stage we have been told that things are on track to start at each moving deadline. So i can only conclude one of two things - they have either been woefully naive in the amount of effort it takes to prepare for a trial in the US, or they have been lying to shareholders. I firmly believe it is the former of the two, and they should have come out and said that yesterday. If they had stood there and said "Do you know what? This has taken far more effort than we originally planned for, but it is a hoop we have to get through. We apologies for the previously stated time scales, but we now believe for all the reasons we have stated, that the trial will start in H1 next year".... then i think people could have accepted that. But to just say "look we have had to produce loads of paperwork" doesn't really cut it with me.

My second gripe is the response on the shareprice. To just respond with "well we don't know why the share price is so low", shouldn't be a good enough answer. We know due to the small volumes traded on AIM that it doesn't take much sentiment change to have a big swing in the price, either positively or negatively. I do not believe Scancell do anywhere near enough to generate positivity among smaller investors that in themselves could sustain a greater share price. Sally's comment that investing in the website takes "time or money, and we don't want to spend money" is a very short term view. We have had to do cash raisings at a ridiculously low price, so spending money on PR would generate a lot more revenue at lower dilution.

Having said all that, i remain firmly invested here and do not plan to sell any of my shares (which i haven't done at any point). Like many people here, i continue to build on my holdings all the time, and my exit will be when the company sells lock stock.

Thanks for the update steve. Look forward to the recording.

As Bjork once said..

"It's oh so quiet"

5. Share holder communication - we had a Proactive Investor video in Dec 17, Jan 18, Feb 18, April 18 and then nothing since. Has the company chosen to go dark on it's shareholders? Why so little comms since early this year.

Ivy - a few from me if you, or anyone else would be so kind to note:

1. The introduction of UK sites to the combination trial - what was the reasoning/plan for this?
2. SCIB 2 update from CRUK - Timelines for trial.
3. Nanovesicle delivery - Has this progressed.
4. Update on Biontech partnership.

JFC

Thanks for that very detailed explanation. It is every bit likely they were talking about the broader use against new targets, but the words just struck as having not been used before. I am still looking for the output from the relationship with the Karolinska Institutet. It could just be that they are feeding in knowledge on the wider immune subject. But i do recall Scancell talking about moditope being potentially uitilised in Immune Disorders. They would of course need to expand on the original patent to cover this.

I'm a bit mystified myself. As @Steve67 says, it could just be a case of they haven't themselves received all the confirmations. It is the patent lawyers who deal with the day to day interaction with the patent office. The documents are published online by the examiner as they are produced.

Will be interesting to see how they avoid disclosing it this afternoon at the AGM, given that they haven't RNS'd it.