Member Info for RayPointer

I would hazard a guess that the calibre of CRUK's scientists and trail development teams are not in the same class as Scancell's.

Evidence, Sally's presentation at the last AGM.

I hope they are not looking for a suitable nano vesicle.
I know this was one of Crumb's concerns.
I have always said, expect delays for the trials since they are cutting edge.

But, at the moment, trials are not being held up by Scancell.
CRUK, FDA and Polypeptide are the culprits past and present.

What are the odds that the Modi1 trial will be first to start?

At least it has moved to "Exploratory" from "Due Diligence"

Morning C7

We have been discussing the SP and the timelines and the next cash raise for what seems an age now.
I think we have done it to death.

Can we now talk about the merits of the science now?
Now, team ramp are convinced about the science but you do not appear to have the same enthusiasm,

Could you tell us exactly why? Then perhaps we could have a meaningful debate about it.
After all, if the science falls down, the rest is irrelevant.

So, the floor is yours. What exactly are your concerns?

Yes

Another way of looking at it.
I would guess big pharma would do some calculations on that basis.

Anyway it easier than trying to understand Brexit politics

I would also allow for products still in development like Modi2 and glycans.
But I would put these in a different section of the spreadsheet - Items above the line and items below the line.

Yes, Inan is right.

But whatever valuation method you choose will not be accurate.

I prefer mine since it is simpler and you can adjust it as events unfold.
For, instance, if it is becoming clear that SCIB1 combo begins to show an increasing divergence from the current standard of care, you just need to adjust the estimated sales price.

But it is all largely subjective and based on what big pharma have paid for other products/companies.

Yes, I believe we are roughly on the same page.

I also allowed for a dilution factor that people could set individually according to their own level of optimism or pessimism on the timescales.

Timescales and hence dilution are also difficult to estimate.

We have seen trial delays and I expected those. What I didn't expect was the FDA taking so long to approve Trigrid2.

But it is possible that you could adjust the dilution factor as particular events happen, such as a BionTech deal, the start of the SCIB1 combo trial etc.

Ruck

Just bringing a bit of humour into what has become a pretty polarised BB recently.

I do find it hard to value the SCLP pipeline.

The Trinity approach is based on future sales. I think this was used since it is the standard way of valuing baby bios.

I remember trying to value it some time ago and suggesting that people set up their own spreadsheet.

My valuations were based on sale of each of the products outright rather than future sales of approved vaccines.
The ratios of the values for SCIB1, SCIB2, and Modi1 that you quote were fairly well aligned to the ratios of my valuations. From memory, I think I stated $1 billion for SCIB1, 2 for SCIB2 and 4 for Modi1.

But then I suggested that for each you apply a percentage based on the stage it has reached in trials. That way you could revalue each time a milestone is reached in a trial.

ATB

The Scancell sale price will be

Sigma (no of patients in a trial x %increase in standard of care)

+ ((no of moditope vaccines) x average number of targets per vaccine)) to the power of (1 + number of Lindy Nobel prizes)

- (number of future dilutions x average % of dilution)

- (number of corporate jets landing at Oxford x average CEO big pharma salary)

All from Einstein's theory of General Relativity

but will Lindy get a Nobel prize, of half or one or none at all?

$1 billion was the figure floated by RG many moons ago. £3.20 per share.
He also halved it to be on the safe side £1.60 per share.
And I think he was referring to Immunobody as a whole but I stand to be corrected on this.
This was before preliminary SCIB1 trial results.

We now have highly successful SCIB1 results
Plus 2 combo trials now planned.
But 100% dilution.

Morning Ruck
These are the 4 previous cash raises made by Scancell

Great post Tommy. No thanks required.

Tommy
I agree with a great deal of what you say.
Where we differ is in your use of mathematical probability

a) The sample of 4 is far too small to use probability. Many statasticians use 30 as a minimum sample size.
b) The events have different circumstances
c) The events do not just have a yes/no outcome. There are a range of different outcomes

So, you can have an opinion but it cannot be based on mathematics.

The word "probability" has 2 meanings. The common usage and the mathematical usage. You have chosen to go down the mathematical route and I say your logic is flawed because of the reasons I have stated.

So any opinion is a guess and not based on mathematics.

You can't go wrong with the high 80s.
I base this on the full time score.
QED

But what is the probability of that happening?

I'm considering being cryogenically frozen.

https://www.disclose.tv/first-human-frozen-by-cryonics-will-be-brought-back-to-life-in-just-ten-years-319623

But is 10 years enough? Perhaps not enough to get Trigrid approved.

BTW C7 - very well done to Chelsea today!

The definition of probability

"the extent to which an event is likely to occur, measured by the ratio of the favourable cases to the whole number of cases possible."

It is impossible to determine the favourable cases, let alone the probability of any one of them happening, Then, on top of that, when will they happen?

Your mathematics simply isn't mathematics. Trump would use the term "fake mathematics".

I do not object to your views. I object to your use of the term probability.