Member Info for ratcliffewriter

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.

I love the racing car analogy - but what happens when you end up with what you tell people is a decent team, a good wingman, and the best driver, but then realise that the reason you can't get any sponsorship is because under the bodywork there isn't a howling turbocharged V12, just a small 2 stroke single with a blown head gasket and the gearbox isn't even connected. Your supporters club can sing and chant and wave banners all they like, and the team can talk earnestly about all the trophies they would like to win, but the car is as much use as a one-legged man (or woman) at a backside-kicking party.

G14 - if anything, the money of the uninvested and their presence on the board is very valuable, as they have fresh funds to invest if a sufficient facts can be produced to convince then to invest. The repetitive rampings of those who have lost massive percentages aren't conducive to buying in as there is no apparent substance to back them up.

More like False Prophets. The sort of setup which if it had toured the old west, would have seen its organisers covered in tar and feathers on a regular basis.

Do true Dracula. And to think only very recently someone posted 'Interest In Small Pharmas Is lost no matter how good the results are' and that AIM is only for trading.

If Adam is not needed in the SAB, it begs the question why he was asked, appointed or accepted in the first place. Then SD says his expertise 'is at a little later stage than many projects discussed at it.'

But doesn't that mean he has knowledge in abundance for what was needed? It's like being in hospital and saying you don't want a registrar treating you because you'd rather have a junior doctor dealing with your ailment (who probably hasn't slept for a week)

Something doesn't smell right to me in that.

201 hasn't been near a patient since before September 2020 when the results of what was arguably the slowest trial in history came out. In the RNS about it they said (word for word) 'Additional detailed analysis of the results will form the basis of peer-reviewed journal publications.'

IMO it's a matter for considerable caution that in well over three years, not a single keystroke of peer review has been achieved. Worth balancing that against PM's apparently blind faith and optimism.

PM - you say 'It is either we remain where we are or we rise big...'

There's another alternative direction which you still seem to ignore.

There have been numerous 'expert' opinions on Redmile's strategy, mainly based around the low end trader mentality - 'they'll hold for 10 percent and be out, sell now before they do' and a confident 'Redmile won't invest for more than a year.'

At least now it's got them to a 50p sell point, which is about the full value of the single Genmab deal done so far (excluding royalties).

Let's just sit and wait....

A strange message from one who claims to be a long term holder and never to have sold a single share.