Member Info for ratcliffewriter

That's hilarious - '201 has some regulatory issues they have to consider.'

Let's rephrase that - '201 had a very few patients on a dose escalation trial. Then it all went totally silent for several years, and it's now as dead as a dodo, because if there was even the slightest flicker of interest it would have surfaced by now.' As far as "the deal is done when it is signed and delivered", what deal did Satu ever see? And what deal did the company see regardless of who was at the helm?

But maybe it was a predictive spelling error - it said 'deal' but meant 'dilution.'

So it's either going to do really well or very badly, and it might take a while but then again might not.

EE - copying and pasting your words due to lazy fingers, but when you say 'the unknown Glymab partner who will decide in December (perhaps for announcement in January) has a fully-negotiated deal ready to go. They are simply making a yes/no decision on whether to press the button' - sounds to me like scancell are in a strong position with a non-negotiable stance. If they want it, those are the terms with no late stage haggling. Interesting.

I doubt scinv will be posting during the week - looks like he only gets access to a computer on weekend release.

There are many variables and points of view, but I suspect if scinv ever went to an AGM (which he won't) he would be instantly recognisable by having brown arms.

That'll be a big disappointment to some!

Many are expecting double digits, me included. The expectation is that first digit is a zero, then a decimal point, then the big unknown as to what the second digit might be.

'posting negative nonsense' or simply a viewpoint that doesn't align with yours ? Why resort to insults and attempts at demeaning anyone who doesn't toe your line?

Had I laid out ten grand some years ago before the first consolidation it would now be worth about a halfpenny. If I'd waited and the same amount had suffered just one consolidation it would be worth 80 quid if the share price had remained the same as just after consolidation, which of course it hasn't.

The more I compare the statements of the supporters' club with the track record and finances of the company (under any management to date) the more I struggle to work out whether it is just a big pumping squad (suggested by the big rise in posts whenever a placing nears) or whether you really genuinely believe what you write. If you replaced the insults and name calling with facts and data then it might give you a little credibility.

If so, it could be on the lines of 'you can't expect funding until you can put forward a convincing investment case.'

If you were in that position PM, what solid factual points would you put forward to persuade a potential investor?

I'm posting a someone who has yet to be convinced of the case for investing here. How about some posts (with reference to facts and statements from RNSs to back them up) from those who feel there is an investment case here. I don't want to hear supposition about who lost money on other shares or who ramped or deramped on another board. That's a matter for the other boards. Porky is right on the number ofnfund raises and consolidations, so what facts are there to say that the science is moving to make class leading advances and attracting substantial investment for what is likely to be a protracted and costly timescale? Forget the playground insults, that's not the way to show belief in a company, it just makes people think you are blinkered rampers.

Originally (as you will know if you've seen my posts over the while) I was tempted to put a wedge in here as an embryonic company with possibilities. However, having learned the hard way many years ago, I paid more attention to the RNSs and applied them to what the BoD said at presentations and elsewhere, and a pattern emerged where I felt there was rarely anything of great substance in the RNSs, and it was well worth revisiting promises, plans or predictions after a few months to see how much was actually achieved. If you do the same you might understand why I still haven't put a penny into this company, and if you look objectively at some of the regular rampers you'd be staggered at the blinkered optimism that seems to pervade, so a little balance never hurt, something which would have saved me money some years ago and which might help others in my former position to make more informed calls on a share.

Just a couple of examples - remember Black Cat bio? They were going to raise 5 million, were hailed as the funding solution by many, but were never heard of again. Remember TheoremRx? 'By Christmas', then an extension of a few weeks, then a final deadline which expired 2 and a half years ago. Remember the 201 results? 11 patients, mixed results and all on a simple dose escalation trial, with peer review papers promised and never written. Nothing has stopped alarm bells ringing quietly and persistently, but it's fascinating to watch and reassuring to think how much money I have saved by watching and waiting - and as it's a board for sharing views, I don't see a problem in being here.

PM - you say Porky has been 'working overtime here in posting more than most.'

According to the members area on LSE, in the last 30 days he has posted on Val 50 times. In that same period you have posted 94 times.

'...we can only go based on probabilities.'

So, based in past performance, when 201 was many years younger...

Assuming it was quoted correctly, I note someone yesterday said ME had said 'no placing until after a 201 update.' There were a lot here who seemed to think this would mean a money generating deal (on something as unsuccessful as 201) and thus no placing. I'm wondering if what it really means is an RNS in which the first paragraph says '201/TheoremRX' is stone dead, as most have long assumed years ago, and then paragraph 2 says 'placing to raise x hundred thousand to pay salaries, bonuses and travel expenses, with enough left over for half a dozen test tubes and a packet of biscuits.' I'm sure we will find out fairly soon.

Shouldn't there be a comma in that title? 'No, placing needed.'

Looks like my assessment was right. The fundamental problem (in layman's terms) seems to be that despite some determined polishers, the tin of polish is small and of poor quality while the tu rd they're trying to polish is simply enormous.

I haven't had a chance to listen to today's publicity, but I remain wary in the absence of an RNS. Without an RNS it is just words - some may remember Sareum many years ago when a director said loud and clear 'we expect to complete at least two commercial deals by the end of the year.' How many came? None. I also can't see how there can be any mileage whatsoever left in 201, nothing reported that shows any life at all breathed back into it.

I'll wait to see what the next RNS says, but I have a nasty feeling I know what's coming - today has all the hallmarks of many previous events here, and you know we aren't talking deals.

PNP - I'm travelling back from Portugal tomorrow so won't catch the presentation live. Presumably it will be available as a recording?

I'm not 'spreading mischief' - I'm someone who has followed this for years waiting for an opportune moment to invest, almost talked into it by the ramp squad but keep scratching the surface and finding nothing of substance underneath. I just can't see an investment case, but if you can persuade me one exists rather than just being abusive then I'm all ears.

I was rather under the impression that he felt that Val was a company with poor management, too much expenditure and no science to attract any commercial interest.