Member Info for RuckRover

TF,
Well if Scancell get the 75% they need, there will be 1 disgruntled BOD member. If they fail to get 75% there will be lots of disgruntled BOD members and a very disgruntled major shareholder.
This is what David Evans alluded to on ADVFN:
"I personally would urge all Shareholders to vote in favour of the resolution as the alternative is deeply deeply unpleasant. Divided Boards never conquer and to be frank this situation should not have developed to its current stage"

C7, sorry I have to disagree with you on the Vulpes position but thanks for supporting me yesterday :)

LL, Thanks for posting the list of providers and method of contact, very useful.

TF, Ray, C7 et al,

Scancell were quite willing to take Vulpes money over a year ago for which they gave up a large element of control. Vulpes became the largest shareholder and Mr Diggle received a place on the board. At the time, they were hailed as saviours of the company, much of the post meeting chat at the 2019 AGM was about Vulpes, the money, the validation of the science (after 7 years following and 1 year due diligience)
Martin Diggle has every right to vote in the interests of his shareholders, possibly he believes this is in the best interests of Scancell as well, who knows?
So personally, if MD has voted with honesty and integrity, the other BOD members should respect his right to vote against. I don't see why anyone should feel awkward about this or indeed in the event of losing why Vulpes would then throw a tantrum and sell out. They invested for a reason and that reason is still valid albeit significantly diluted.
Just my opinion guys..

C7,
Yes I am promoting debate - well spotted. I’m neither for nor against, I’m undecided because I feel we haven’t been given sufficient information to make one. There are more than simply two opposing opinions.
Some think we have been given enough information and happy to vote (either way).
Some think we haven’t been given enough information but are still happy or at least prepared to vote.
Some think we haven’t been given enough information and not happy to vote.

I think whether or not an individual feels they have enough information to make a decision is a matter for the individual and should not be subject to ridicule or accusations of an ulterior motive.

It is probably worth pointing out it is not just Vulpes who voted against but a “small number of shareholders”. So the argument it’s just Vulpes looking after their own interests doesn’t convince me.

Spot on Ray! It would be very ironic if my 0.06 % swung it lol.

Morning GF,
I have certainly been vocal over the years that the hand to mouth raises in the past have meant we haven’t progressed as quickly as we would like. I had envisaged various scenarios, for example having to sell a lot of shares at a low price in order to reach the sums necessary or selling a relatively moderate amount of shares at a premium price. I thought the August raise was OK - more money than we’d ever had, a moderate amount of shares at a decent price.
We were told, this money was to advance the pipeline in order to increase its value to potential suitors.
Then in a matter of weeks, we are told that we are selling another big chunk of an already expanded base at what would appear to be on the cheap. Is it just me but aren’t we in it for something a bit more than 13p.
I have absolutely no qualms with this if 1) we really need the money for something and 2) we are sure it will be spent wisely. Now, as shareholders, surely we are entitled to be told that.
And you are being totally condescending to say it is a no brainier for any PI. One large shareholder (probably with a bigger stake than you and I) has used his brain to decide differently.
Maybe turkeys vote for Christmas because they have no brains?
So GF, more than happy to debate the pro and cons but spare us the snide remarks.

Morning Ivy, All,

It would nice if we woke up to a written statement from Scancell clearing explaining
The rationale behind the second raise, what will the money be spent on
The basis of the large shareholder objection (not making a case, just outlining the cause)
A rough cash flow projection, simply total spend year 1, year 2, year 3

Failing that, the vote suspended until after the AGM (or AGM brought forward)

Does anyone know why the Redmile share purchase (rather than CLN) went through without a vote? Presumably that was a unanimous board decision.

Crumbs,
“They also answer emails”
I’m sure many like me are reluctant to email individual board members as I appreciate they are very busy. Why should I be disadvantaged? Surely ALL information divulged to a shareholder should be shared with all? And I’m not talking about posting on BBs which I consider appalling manners.

Crumbs,
Noted your later post as well: I include Vulpes in my disappointment - Martin Diggle is a board member , sorry I should have made that clear.

Regarding this post:
I have read the “official” communications from Scancell. The list of things that the money is to be used on is no different to the list of things in the £15m August raise.
So what’s changed in 2 months to require an ADDITIONAL £30m?
Correct me if I’m wrong but following the August raise the message was we were “fully funded for two years”. I don’t recall them saying but on a limited subset of the projects mentioned previously or that there wouldn’t be enough to run them “in parallel”

So either, the current communication is inadequate OR the previous communication was misleading.

I’m happy to believe there IS a genuine reason why more money is needed - just tell me what it is!

AB,
Spot on - exactly what I have been saying.
The communication with the shareholder base has, as ever, been almost nonexistent.

Dalester,
I read that the cost of bringing a new drug to market was $1.3B. It would be Gould to understand the huge gulf between this and the numbers you quote.

https://www.lshtm.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2020/average-cost-developing-new-drug-could-be-15-billion-less-pharmaceutical

Chester,
“So your decision to vote or not vote is based on what you think the problem might be.”
I don’t know what the problem is, I don’t know who is blocking it. I don’t believe I have suggested I do, if so I apologise.
That’s the whole point - we haven’t being given the arguments for and against (or who’s objecting)
I worked for a company where R&D were given loads of money to pursue their aspirations. They went bust.

C7,
You make a compelling case on some points and in some ways am swayed toward your view. For example, 12 months ago I would probably accepted A big raise at 4p. So why can’t I accept 13p from Redmile. It’s a good question and one I need to ponder.

Just a quick response to your.....
“What is your hesitancy about us having such large resources at our disposal, at a time when we have more platforms than ever before and existing platforms which are now ready for trials“

I think of Apple when they were struggling. I think they had 100 projects on the go. When Steve Jobs went back, he chopped them back to 5. They launched the iPod, iPad and iPhone shortly after and as they say, the rest is history.
The danger is we will end up with 10 platforms 20% complete rather than 1 100%, 1 90% and 1 80% complete. I think the latter will have the better chance of monetisation.

All my opinion and musings, hopefully food for thought?

Ray,
Your 20:49..
Sorry I have to disagree with everything you’ve said there, apart from the last statement possibly.

Crumbs,
“ join the minority”
Well the maths are so long as the the minority is over 25% the motions won’t get passed.

Ratty,
I agree with your statement regarding the pivotal and dedicated role of LD.
But surely “what exactly will all this money be spent on?” Is a legitimate question? And possibly a question we shouldn’t be expecting the CSO to answer.

Evening empty,
“ I'm one of the new arrivals you refer to”
Who’s your post to, Who is referring to new arrivals?

Crumbs,
Yes, if I can’t decide, I won’t vote. My worry is that others, in exactly the same position (clueless) WILL vote based on nothing but emotion and hearsay.
It could be turkeys voting for Christmas - we just don’t know.

Ray,
The moditope trials have been planned for over five years. There were always going to be 4 targets so surely someone can do trial cost multiplied by 4 to work out how much it is going to cost?

C7,
Yes, I would look forward to hearing the plans. Unfortunately the AGM is too late to use the information to decide which way to vote. It would be good to have a detailed breakdown of how and when the money will be spent.
As for the email, two problems 1) there is no way of verifying the authenticity and 2) if it is authentic you have to question the appropriateness of a BOD member communicating with an individual shareholder.
But like you, I have total trust in LD on the scientific side. I’m not sure finance is her thing.
ATB.

Evening C7,
Hope you are well? I enjoyed your well constructed post.
I am still undecided. Here is what I put earlier on ADVFN any comments welcome.

Let’s get real for a minute. The extra GBP17.9m from CLNs is to make the balance sheet look good - Scancell have said as much in the adjournment RNS.
The GBP25M already in Scancell?s bank account is more than enough to progress the trials. I suspect that in the next 12 months, Scancell will not get through 10m of that.
It is a window dressing exercise. Do I want to give away a big chunk of the company on the cheap to make the books look good? I’m not sure I do.

I know you (and many others) won’t agree, but that is genuinely where I’m at right now.