It is interesting to observe then going arguments centred around who is "right" and "wrong"
Anyone can pick a moment in time and prove they were right and others were wrong.
Just because a share price falls it doesn't Necessarily follow that holding is "wrong". Warren Buffet is probably the best example of a long term holder. He says "never buy a share you are not prepared to hold for 20 years". (Scancell will soon fall into that bracket for me!)
But equally, if someone chooses to trade, that's not "wrong" either. It's just a different strategy.
Presumably, all investors here want to make money? There are multiple ways of doing that, perhaps some more effective than others, but each to their own.
Mayo,
"Anyone feel sorry for Muddy Waters, Chinook’s short seller?"
I find it hard to believe a legend like Muddy Waters would be dabbling in helicopter shares - particularly since he died forty years ago.
"So would expect some news Weds/Thurs"
Is this likely to be different from expecting news prior to/during/after the AACR presentation or expecting news prior to/during/after the ASCO presentation?
I'm sure someone will come up with numerous reasons why it is.
Wtp,
"scarlet only turns up when a stock is due a massive rise"
Well, sorry to break this to you but a crackin appearance has never to date preceded a "massive rise". Quite the opposite, it has preceded a fall as predicted.
"just before ASCO and the strong likelihood of an associated RNS with newer trial updates"
The only people who believed there was a "strong likelihood" of an RNS were the fully paid up members of the happy clappy club.
Ratty,
"without having to play the sp to a gallery of aim trading ****roaches."
I'm not sure why you are so toxic towards traders. Without traders there would be less liquidity and therefore fewer opportunities to buy (or sell!) shares.
Wtp,
"on a more serious note, how many patients could have been helped in that time?"
Well at least 80 on the trial.
There are over 2000 deaths from melanoma each year in the UK alone so had the trials led to approval then thousands of lives could have been saved.
This situation isn't unique to Scancell of course, it applies to many treatments awaiting trial for whatever reason.
Violindog,
“ I still hold all my shares and i have never traded SCLP . I seriously regret not taking profits ”
I’m afraid those were your investment decisions. You can’t really lay the blame for your choices on the BOD.
Bobbust,
I agree, the SP today is not their number one priority.
But surely they have a responsibility to ensure it is as high as it can be in order to keep investors reasonable happy? This includes private investors who own a good chunk of the company and have supported the numerous cash calls.
Whilst it is true that the board cannot control the SP, don’t you think with better communication it may not have dropped so much?
Violindog,
Whether or not BioNtec are interested in SCLP or not is irrelevant to the point I was making.
There seems to be a lot of focus on personalised vaccines and you may be lead to the conclusion that these will supersede other treatments (such as Moditope). In the article, Tureci of BioNTech says they are pursuing off the shelf options as well. There is an admission that cancers are not all unique but rather exhibit a number of common traits that can be targeted (as indeed Moditope is)
I see it a bit like made to measure clothes. Two hundred years ago, everting was made to measure. Today, ready to wear clothes account for 99% of the market. They are much cheaper to manufacture, benefitting from automation and economies of scale. Also, it is not the case that one size fits all - there are numerous size and fit choices.
Finally, on the made to measure analogy:
A decent fitting suit made from quality material will look better than a bespoke one in inferior material and mediocre workmanship.
A friend of mine bought some nice new wool cloth in a classic navy pinstripe. He had it made to fit in Hong Kong for a fraction of what it would cost in the UK. When he collected it, it fitted perfectly. Unfortunately, the stripes were horizontal instead of vertical!
Nom, not sure about “should interest some” - it should interest everyone with an investment here.
There has been a lot of talk about “personalised” vaccines. Even professor Ottensmier mentioned them in the Scancell news story even though Scancells approach is non-personalised. There does seem to be a consensus amongst the scientific community that personalised treatments are the way forward.
Which makes the article so interesting. BioNTech who are pursuing the personalised route, state that they are also looking at off the shelf treatments since many cancers have common traits. That is quite an endorsement of Scancell’s approach IMO.