Member Info for ratcliffewriter

Just 88 percent down. Better than anyone who was here before even the latest consolidation, and that explains why Suzy hasn't put any real money in here - she's probably a lot more switched on that she appears to some.

PM - 'Adam was saying 10/20 million upfront for that alone and he would know more than any of us.'

He also owns about 7 percent of the company, so is he really being objective, or just trying desperately to stop his outlay from going down the pan any further?

I presume you're talking 20p for the company rather than per share?

Or the alternative Dracula 'I'm not pessimistic but' line - "All these conferences going on and they aren't presenting. What's wrong with the science?"

To be fair it's had considerable trader interest over the years, often quite intrusively, and as far as 'unloved' goes, Vulpes and Redmile seemed affectionate enough to stick many tens of millions into it after very considerable due diligence. Patience is a virtue.

'Everybody happy with a £1?' - very reminiscent of the old guard who would propose something, talk about it for a bit, then say 'We are all agreed....'

Any 'final' price relies on the assumption there will be a buyout, so a big string of 'ifs.' Very tiresome.

It's probably worth clarifying a couple of things which keep cropping up and tend to get a little distorted at times - one is that Redmile (and Vulpes and Calculus) are not quick buck fly-by-night setups. If they consider today's share price 'derisory' then imo they are not likely to grab the first low ball offer that pops up, especially given the recent progress and quality of the current trials. The data is very good, and expected to increase in quality and volume. Not the point to bale out I would say.

Second point where the basic facts seem to get ignored - if Redmile's holding does go over 30 percent, yes they are required to make an offer for the whole company. However, the board and shareholders are not obliged to accept it, in which case Redmile simply carry on with an increased shareholding. There seems to be a mentality that promotes the idea that crossing the 30 percent holding means an immediate buyout at a low price. Wrong.

Sit back, relax, enjoy the ride folks.

I bet they don't manage to string out calling an EGM for two and a half years like they have with the TheoremRx farce. So at least that will be proof they can meet a deadline when under pressure.

If ever an RNS was announced through gritted teeth, this is it.

Presumably the Little Soap Company does beauty products for some of those elderly mice.

C11 - probably as he finds it hard to be objective with all those splinters in his posterior from sitting on the fence and gyrating every which way.

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...