Member Info for RuckRover

Just done the calculation.

Cash at end of April 2019 = £4.56M
Vulpes cash £3.9M
Current cash burn £580K per month.

So will be down to the last £1.5M by April 2020. Would not be wise to let funds run down more.

So what about the JC comment that were funded until 2021? Slip of the tongue and he meant 2020? Or does he think funds are coming from somewhere else?

Ok, I’ll try a bit harder!

C7, I can confirm I understand. But if you are asking me to stand there and take punches in the face without defending myself then I’m afraid I can’t sorry. In fact, I’ll defend anyone against unjustified attack as you know.

or NOT dropping in our laps should I say!
Rather than not droppings (from the rabbit)

Evening C7,
I was reprimanding Knowlesi on his dismissing posts as worthless and used as an example things people don't talk about eg funding.
It was not meant to give credibility to his claim or to suggest that I too thought a fund raise was imminent.
My point was there is more information to be gleaned from the BB on top of the content, you get a flavour of sentiment (good and bad) as well. The willingness to talk about a concern may be a more positive sign than a reluctance to.
I haven't done any cash flow projections yet (do enough of those at work lol) but if I do I will offer an opinion on when we will need to raise cash (in the event of a rabbit from the hat-left field-non dilutive-mega deal dropping in our laps!
ATB.

DP,
A very timely reminder, yes, some of us do have jobs but had forgotten. Thanks to you reminding us, we (some of us) remember to go to work. This could account for the unusually small number of contributions today.
Could you give me a wake up call tomorrow about 6:00am please?

Knowlesi,
There is one person here who is the self-appointed judge os posting quality. If he had his way would also dictate post content. Please don’t descend to that level.

For me, there is no such thing as a worthless post. The who, when, frequency, sentiment all contribute to the overall picture. Sometimes it is what people don’t say or speak of that is just a telling. For example why do people frequently and optimistically talk about “deals” (that never materialise) but are reluctant to talk about fund raising (that frequently do)?

Who was that?

Inan “ deflect ?

hardly”

My apologies, I hadn’t thought it through properly. You were referring to people who “appear to be smart”
You don’t fit into that category as you don’t even APPEAR to be smart.

Inan,
“ Bermuda, Tf and myself all highlight ... your "incorrect version" of Royalties”
No you didn’t. Royalties are very straightforward, there’s not much that could possibly be misunderstood. Like I say, I have been a recipient of royalties for many years so I know what they are and I know how they are accounted for in the accounts.
Have you ever received royalties?

“I am sorry but posters that feel "entitled" to be right by posting to appear smart, often are not ... its mainly waffle”

That’s a very thinly disguised physiological deflection.

Inan,
I’m not sure why you think I don’t understand royalties? I should do as I have been paid plenty over the years.

The things that HAVE been criticised (with some regularity) has been
The Bods management in monetising the science
The over hyped expectation of what the science might materialise in monetary terms.

Correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t recollect anyone in 7 years, on any board ever criticising the science.

Inan,
You always seem to pop up when we are talking valuation and sp targets and throw in synergy, SCIB1 data, homo-citrullinasation etc etc.

Valuation is always based on earnings. So you need to understand what markets Scancell will compete in, what the market value is, what Scancell’s market penetration will be and how much profit Scancell will generate and distribute to shareholders. The later will be determined not only by the efficiency of their operation but also by how much they CHOOSE to reinvest in further research and development. It may well be that Scancell over many years will develop treatments for a wide range on cancers at the expense of shareholders.

It may be helpful if in respect of your £8 valuation you 1) justified it mathematically and 2) gave us an idea of when.

Inan,

“so don't knock £8 a share when you have so many potential targets across 3 platforms”

I don’t think anyone should rule out £8 per share, anything is possible. The questions are: what will it take, how long will it take and how much extra funding will need to be pumped in.

Bermuda,
Just caught up on the later posts, just to clarify..
I have discounted “deals” as in up front cash injection in respect of advance royalties. Obviously any sort of royalty payment will by definition be a deal of sorts.

In the absence of a cash injection deal, I have assumed a fund raise.

Berm 14:47
Yes.

Ivy, crumbs, Ray, TF,
All your points noted, good to have a mix of opinions.
What I have posted are my own personal views on which I base my own personal investment decisions.
In many ways I hope I am wrong and an unexpected mega-deal drops on the table. It would be better for me (and others) financially perhaps!

TF 8.06,

Well yes, the intellectual assets have increased this was Ray’s original claim at the start.
However the cost of materialising those assets have increased and the likelihood of monetising them has gone down, at least in the short term.

I have allowed for a raising of £6M at 5p in my projections.