Member Info for RuckRover

I think the problem is we all have an unbalanced view of what is "balanced" Lol.

Moonparty,

So what's balanced about ignoring risks then?

It's a shame people are rubbishing the Motley Fool article just because it disagrees with their own "no risk", "we are minted" happy clappy blinkered view.

Rather than the article being contradictory, it spells out the case for investing AND the case for NOT investing. Both cases are based on a balanced analysis of the facts rather than fallacy.

The case FOR investing: Results so far are positive. If successful Scancell will tap into an extremely large market. They have cash in the bank to get them part way to approval.

The case AGAINST investing: AIM penny shares are high risk. This is even more so with Biotech shares. There is not enough cash to see them all the way to approval, so dilution cannot be ruled out. (Don't forget, even LD refused to rule this out)

So sorry if this balanced analysis offends, but there it is.

So, you can accept the risk and invest anyway (as I have done)

You can reject the risk and not invest as I'm sure many have done.

Or you can ignore the risk and invest anyway.

Those are personal choices and each are quite entitled to do whatever they choose. But please, let the facts dictate your decision, don't try and bend the facts to match it.

Looks like most have reasonably realistic expectations here.

Https://www.trinitydelta.org/research-notes/scope-readouts-in-sight-scib1-data-in-q424/

Buddha,

I think it's really difficult talking about "targets". This could mean several things - the potential SP, the SP that you think is realistically achievable or the threshold at which you will sell. I also think it's dangerous setting a "target" as it could 1) make you hold longer than you should as it's not reached or 2) sell early once it has been reached but it then goes on to grow further.

When I first invested in 2012 my target was £3.20 based on comments from RG that the plan was to sell the company at many multiples of the then price (33p). He also mentioned a sales price of $.5B-$1B. There were only 224M shares in issue at the time so this would suggest an SP of between £1.70 and £3.60.

But setting that target (even if it was just in my head) stopped me cashing in at 60p, 50p, 40p as it peaked and then dropped. The £3.20 "target" was no longer valid since the premise on which it was based was no longer valid. The arrival of Moditope and the delay in progressing SCIB1 meant that the plan to sell the company outright was out of the window.

So having invested back in 2012 and bought into most of the open offers I find myself sat on just under half a million shares with an average price of 13.72p.

So what's my personal "target" now. Well, I think the ultimate potential for Scancell is to become an £8 Billion pound company. Does that mean £8 per share? Of course not. Getting to that value will take time and a hell of a lot more money. So a realistic target of £2, possibly £4 max.

What will I sell at? Well, I'll probably sell 10% of my holding at 30p just because I could use the cash for my trip to Oz. I'll then sell 20% at 60p, 20% at £1 and then see where the rest end up. I think the key is to have a bit of flexibility and react to the situation as it occurs.

Scinv

"It means I was drawn into an investment with you lot."

Given your extensive experience and knowledge I'm surprised at such a demonstration of herd mentality. You saw a flock of sheep galloping somewhere and decided to join them?

You must have done some research - was there anything in particular that drew you in? Perhaps someone posted "£8 coming soon?"

Chelsea11,

Yes, Australia has the highest incidence of melanoma per capita out of all countries. This is because of the very high UV levels and a predominantly fair skinned population- due to European migration.

The incidence is higher in men than women.

Someone asked why there weren't many trial locations for SCIB in the north of England. I assumed it was because the weather is not as sunny as down south. Interestingly, the highest incidence of Melanoma in the UK is in the North East but only in women. The men are around the national average.

The cause of this anomaly - sun beds!

Tempted to buy 72 myself just to get the ball rolling

Matt,

"The SP is very depressing considering we are potentially on the cusp of 'world best' data."

Well until they say something and confirm the great early results have been replicated no one seems keen to commit.

I do think arguing about a whether a fraction change on 13.25p is up or down rather irrelevant. Wake me up when it doubles, or better still, when it get to the TD "conservative" 33p.

C11,

OK, I get that. But the companies listed DO have a relationship so presumably if Scancell were to have a relationship they would then appear in the list?

You see my confusion?

"Will that include any relationship with Scancell? Who knows"

Well Scancell aren't listed in the list of collaborators so I guess not.

That's a great find WTP.

So after their flagship polio vaccination supply they list Scancell as their next exciting opportunity. They must be confident.

I want to know if our founder, CEO and CSO is going on any dangerous rides at Disney World and what risk assessments are being done.

Price sensitive information should be subject to RNS. where is it?

CW,

SC27 is one of Scancell's GlyMabs so that possibly reinforces the connection do you think?

With the lack of upward movement in the SP, it is patently obvious that there is some sort of "drag". So if it's not funding then what is it?

Everything else looks really positive.

Joaung,

No, I don't think it's pessimistic on the contrary, it's very optimistic. You wouldn't be planning a phase2/3 trial, recruiting the team to run it and sorting out finances unless you thought the chance of success was high would you?

As Burble said, there's nothing new in it but there is confirmation and reinforcement of what we already know and no negatives. It's all about expectations - if you were expecting fireworks you will be disappointed. If you were expecting a neutral statement of the finances then that is exactly what you have got.

As I have been saying since January, the fireworks will be a Tuesday in October. (hopefully 2024!)

Falsedawn,

Thanks, I had forgotten that.

Was that a resolution at the AGM or is it n the articles of association?

Like you say it will be interesting whatever way goes.

Matt,

No, they aren't pathetically low. You need to understand what the TD 33p represents. It is a risk adjusted, time adjusted valuation based on "conservative assumptions". It isn't what they think the company is worth is everything is successful.

The latter is easy to calculate (using the TD conservative assumptions). You simply remove the risk and time elements from their figures.

So what is the TD valuation? Using their model with risk/time removed it is £4.05p. This is for SCIB1, MODO1, Glycans and Avidimab. TD do not ascribe a value to SCIB2, MODI2 or Covidity.

So, if you factor in my (hypothetical) share placing of 200M shares, that value drops to £3.47 per share.

Dilution doesn't destroy any intrinsic value of the company, the extra funds enhance it as it provides the means to progress. The only difference is that existing share holders get a smaller slice of the cake. But as it is a bigger cake, so what?

I'd rather have £3.47 per share than 23p, 33p or 15p.

And that's based on "conservative assumptions"