We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
The other problem with the LOI is that it gave exclusivity, which means a guarantee that it was Theorem or nobody. Maybe Black Cat will pop up with the 5 million they were going to raise instead. That was another one that was announced and then never heard from again.
C11 - same reason he's always been here I suppose.
If it wasn't for the three 125:1 consolidations I calculate they'd have around 257,812,500,000,000 shares in issue.
The abusive retort doesn't exactly cement your status as a provider of informed prediction. So, a guess. What do you guess this RNS will contain? Board resignations? Difficult trading conditions? Major deal worth billions? Theorem LOI cut into four and hung in the bog?
I've got a feeling it's going to be a week where something may or may not happen. Like every other week.
When I see 'Got a feeling it's going to be a good week' I always think 'this AIM poster must know what they're on about, so I'd better get a decent wedge in here ASAP.'
NOT.
Agreed - that's quite enough of your sauce burble.
I was just concluding from your post that you see Scancell remaining independent for some 30 years, and the sp rising to 8 pounds. An interesting prediction, quite unlike many of your previous posts. We shall see.
So Ruck is now forecasting 8 pounds a share.
What a waste of space article. So in a year of renting a lab, they have no income from it (because if it was generating revenue that would have been mentioned more than an account of 'how we moved our stuff in a van'). More significant is what it didn't mention - revenue (because there is none) institutional investors (because there aren't any) trials in progress (none) noteworthy trial results (none, last one ended 5 years ago and not one promised peer review has appeared) and money available to further any work (none). It read more like a 'what I did in my summer holidays' kid's junior school essay than anything to do with a commercial company, written by a 'cutting edge' scientist...
I assume the change of auditors will be a disappointment to a select few who tentatively retained the idea of a problem in the accounts rather than (as stated) a problem with the auditors.
Fair comment WTP when you said '.. is Prof. Durrant finally(?) deciding to highlight the limitations of the personalised approach and push the advantages in the approach Scancell is taking.'
I suppose that while there has been a lot of head scratching wondering why LD hasn't trumpeted the advantages of Scancell science before, it now makes sense to push the science if they have the finical results to say 'and here's the proof in decent quantities', whereas prior to this it would have been more on the 'we hope' lines. Can we assume that 'we hope' is now 'we know' and 'here's the proof.'
Proof in human trials as you say, and an ORR that greatly exceeds the best in class, and substantially exceeds the target in the trial (so far, anyway - but great confidence from those running the trial that the ORR will maintain or increase as the numbers of patients rises, as I recall)
I'll second that Bermuda - the tone of information releases from the company have been consistent for so many years, never talking things up, and in fact as most of us are aware often seen as failing to capitalise on significant news which could have been used to generate greater publicity. This was especially frustrating to some as more 'sexed-up' news releases would have made for a more volatile share price and given more vocal trading opportunities for some of our departed or less visible friends. So assuming the level of reporting is consistent now as it has always been, this year could well be a lot more exciting than previous ones. LD has a reputation for calm delivery of news, I have no reason to think she suddenly wants to change that. Anyway, back to sitting and waiting. Time will tell as ever.
Wow! Was it 21 days they had to respond and did it in three! If only they were as prompt on a few other deadlines.
While their stake in Val is only about 300,000 pounds' worth, it still seems odd that when their website says they '...specialise in providing finances for small and medium-sized businesses...' they chose to buy on the open market rather than looking to acquire new issue shares and thus actually put fresh money into the company. Their investment doesn't help Val's financial situation one iota.
Possible nom, but then again if they fired a parting salvo that said the science and/company was a waste of space itbwould raise a few questions about board members claiming to be full of confidence and unconcerned. Maybe that will get amended to just 'unconcerned' in the coming weeks. Or maybe 'short on confidence and very concerned.'
Time will tell...
Kheldar - I think PM2022 typed it wrong. He meant to say 'I have no evidence TRX has raised the funds.'
Because he hasn't. Nor has anyone else.
So the best remedies get put aside to rot and anything less hasn't got a hope. How very bleak.
'Perhaps she isn't being whisked off elsewhere.'
Probably not when the RNS says 'today announces that Dr Sally Adams is retiring .'
If you read the RNS....
Pondering hypothetical future figures is always difficult, except when it's impossible. But it can be fun.
Genmab paid 5 million up front for one glymab to play with, and so far it seems to be going very well. Possible maximum revenue in time on that deal is over half a billion, obviously it might never get there, but at the moment it's still a possibility and technically 'on.'
5 other companies want in (potentially more as things go on, or less if some drop out of course) and initial payments could be another 5 million or so each, with (maybe) another possible half billion or more from each (plus royalties of course). So if one company wanted to shut all competition out, how much of a deal could that be? Just a nice thought for the weekend.