Member Info for RuckRover

Does anyone know who were asking the questions at the end? I got the impression some were current holders as they were quite clued up.

Deadly, I have listened to it so...…

1) What are the hold ups at the FDA? (this is the biggie)
FDA issue not mentioned. CH reiterated during the Q&A that there would be 3 UK sites and 2 US ones and that Keith Flaherty was definitely still on-board.

2) What did they have to say about the current share price?
Nothing

3) Funds situation
CH during Q&A said that they would not have the funds to complete the MODI1 trial as it was large (40 patients).

4) Did attendees get the impression a BioNTech tie-up was basically a
BioNtech was spoken about as a collabotation. Someone asked about the possibility of "non-dilutive" funding and the fact that the BioNtech collaboration was due to end in June. CH said a deal was a "possibility" but depended on the research being successful. The research is ongoing and BioNtech have options on licencing so a deal was "absolutely a possibility"

Other non-dilutive possibilities were mentioned by CH - grants, deals, partners, he said he couldn't predict but that they have "lots of conversations with lots of people".

The bit I liked was his GOT reference - "data is coming...." He reiterated that it is data that gets deals.
According to the slide we should get 5 patients SCIB1 data Q1 2020 and all data Q4 2020.

Crumbs,
"I think the original point was about fund raising ? Very obvious, so hardly worth mentioning"

I think it is worth mentioning. The ultimate value of our investment here (return) is determined by these major factors:

Market Size
Market Share
Cost to develop (/market/launch/support)
Time to market

I think a lot of people have not factored in cost and time. An investment of £100 that returns £1000 in a year is better than an investment of £100 that return £1000 in ten years.

So a ten bagger in 6 months is far more attractive than a 10 bagger in 15 years. This was to be a short term ten bagger but I suspect I will have had money tied up for 15 years before I see a decent return.

I too wouldn't invest any more in VAL but the danger is Scancell will end up in a similar situation.

Inan,

No, I am merely giving YOU the opportunity to set the record straight. If you DON'T think Scancell will capture 100% of the oncology market, what DO you think they will get?
If you no longer think £8 per share is possible, what DO you think is possible?

Inan,

So what's your view on how much money it will take to get SCIB1 to market?
SCIB2/MODI1?

For those actually interested in the cost of development....

https://www.managedcaremag.com/news/20170914/costs-bring-drug-market-remain-dispute

Roses, I'm not naming and shaming!

There are a few here who believe that Scancell will capture 100% of the cancer market, make 90% GP and the SP will be in the stratosphere no taking into account any cost of development.

I'm all for a bit of hope and optimism but I take mine with a dose of realism.

Roses,
"Ruck, I don't think there is a single poster on here that has 'a reluctance to acknowledge' that."
I can think of a few lol!

I think there are a number of similarities and a number of important differences.
The hurdle both companies (and indeed all Biotech companies) face, is the huge cost of bringing drugs to market. As year1970 says, they both will need an enormous amount of funding (from somewhere!)

I note a reluctance to acknowledge this here. It is after all a FACT of life.

Crumbs
"NASDAQ set to value BioNtech at $8 billion but scancell sat at £20 million ... somethings not right there lol...so I'm buying"

It's a valid point. What you need to appreciate is that the £20M valuation is simply the number of shares in circulation multiplied by the price of the last sale. (OK, so its actually the mid point between the lowest MM bid and highest MM ask but you get my point)

Who said they would be?

Interesting to see TD re-iterate their valuation figures. We had a discussion on valuation not long back. Ray Pointer provided a link to an article explaining Biotech drug valuations and it had a link to a spreadsheet you can download. It is very complex and takes into account all sorts of development costs (PDFU which I hadn't heard of but is quite substantial, orphan drug credits etc etc)

Anyway it did motivate me to investigate NPV which I now understand - Still not too bothered about rNPV (risk adjusted) that TD use.

So just as an update, if you take the TD sales forecast for SCIB1, use a 17.5% royalty, a PE of 20, a 60% GP and factor in 100% dilution, I get 68p per share when revenue starts to flow. If this is in 2026, the NPV using a 12.5% discount is an SP of 27p.

That's just for SCIB1. The dilution factor is high, maybe £20M allocated to SCIB1 alone is a bit high. What do you reckon it will cost to see SCIB1 through to market?

Well I'm sure every day of delay can be attributed to something. If this was the ONLY delay I may have been a bit more forgiving.
Anyway, great news that at least one trial is starting in one country, gives us something to look forward to and pin our hopes on.

C7, see my 13:34

"Ruck i appreciate Hanna is on the way …"

No acknowledgement of your error
No apology

Just the usual unintelligible gibberish, your last refuge of retreat. Or is it going to be "I'm not playing tennis anymore" white flag?

C7, enjoyed your upbeat analysis of the CH interview.
Just goes to show that two people with the same hopes looking at the same thing can have such a different conclusion.

Inan,

If you are going to pull someone up on facts, you really need to get your OWN facts correct. I attempted to report honestly the gist of what was said, and I think I did that. But if you want to be hyper-uber-pernickety this is what was ACTUALLY said (re SCIB1 trial)

"We expect to start dosing before the quarter in in the UK"

"expect to see interim data come out in erm, throughout 2020. There's a 2 year, er, 1 year follow up so"

"by the END of 2020 we will have TREATMENT data"

so your
"what was actually said ... "interim data will be available""
is not only half the story but FACTUALLY WRONG.

Still waiting for the apology...….

C7, are you talking about the expired stock? That was in June 2016. A new batch was manufactured and delivered in July 2017. The expired stock was 7 years old so I would think the shelf life is 5/6 years.
Whether this batch is enough to cover the SCIB1 combo trials, I don't know. So long as they don't leave it to run out and order 12 months in advance we should be OK.

Inan,

I notice your inappropriate comment got removed. I guess you realised you crossed a line and rang your mates to report it - it wasn't me.

An apology would be welcomed.....

Inan,
"Lets hope you get elected as CEO at the AGM ruck ..
you can save Scancell .. "

I never suggested that, it is a figment of your imagination. A bit like saying BBC correspondent Laura Kuenssberg is putting herself forward as prime minister because she asks awkward questions.

Maybe you can't deal with facts? My last post was extracts from Scancell documents and direct quotes from CH's presentation. Maybe he will do better later?