Member Info for TommyFlowers

Crumbs, I think it was you who said earlier i would not be pushing this name to friends and family at this point and I think that was very well put .... finance sorted, trial data widows and orphans welcome .... right now it is for less delicate types who should be able to deal with the reality of the situation .... if they don’t like it they can post back a counter point .... but going on about hidden agendas and negativity suggests to me high entry prices and limited desire/ability to average down.... I am very sympathetic if that is the case but they need to grow a pair and engage in reasoned debate rather than Happy Clapping as someone on the other board calls it. This does not apply to you, in case you were wondering!

Crumbs, trust me I am not negative on sclp in the longer term .... but I do think the management is pretty poor and it is massively under financed and there is far to much emhispis on a transformative deal .... they way we help ourselves is by presenting our science in the best possible liight mainly via data and we are not very good at this. I am a shareholder who is prepared to add in to a placement. So if that is an unsettling position to some or they want to view it as negative the good luck to them.

Until we get data to help our case other factors dominate, they are not my rules that is what 5p is telling us. In fact from what I can deduce you are doing something similar.

Is that a trick question?

Yes.

Ratty, rather unsurprisingly once again you offer nothing .....

Ratty, We can start crossing things of the list .... we agree you don’t do finance, ok fair enough .... want to do the science ? Tell us about the under appreciated prospects in the science ? Looking back on this board there has been years and years of to and fro on the science ... tell me where is the potential that has not been covered at length in the past ? Shoot Ratty .... an open goal for you.

Ratty, I take it from your post you don’t have a clue about where cash level might be, I accept the fact that as you say you don’t care. But in my book “don’t know, don’t care” is the definition of wilful ignorance.

Might be a few fewer by the close today given the very nice volume we are seeing !

Yes as at the middle March that is the number they still held.

Ratty, what is our monthly cash burn ? You must know this number ? With that burn what is our cash balance at the end of March ?, give us your minimum levels the board will allow before having to tap the market .... so come on show us what you know then we can talk about wilful ignorance with respect to cash levels.

Holbrook, who was the reply from .... interesting they suggest they are unsuited for AIM .... maybe that means a takeover is more likely ?

Sorry, did not mean to come across as suggesting you were concerned ..... I agree the amount required is what it is and one is either in for at least their prorata share or they are not and if you are in the price is effectively meaningless.

My point is I don't think the board will see it quite that way and if a placement was done at 4p .... I dont think they would be brave enough (somewhat understandably) to scale it to the point where we we can see if the pudding is worth eating.

The split of the business in to two arms is an interesting thought and has merit. Sadly, it is probably too late to effectively consider that option now.

RR, I think your capital raise scenario is a pretty bullet proof one ... I suspect they would not be brave enough to do 15 million at 4p, they would go smaller at that level maybe 5 - 7million, although I agree it would be good to clear this hurdle once and for all. I suspect they would be banking on a SCIB1 start date share price rally and the. Looking to place @10 million at say 7p or 7.5p ...... it is a fine line they are walking.

Let’s hope it is academic and a deal is forthcoming to avoid it.

TF, it depends which end of the telescope you are looking through. It is like mixing a G&T .... normally the dilution is measured by how much tonic you put in .... so 1:1, 1:4, 1:6 etc .... you are right that you can never be fully diluted as some gin will always remain and hence your 99.99% comment. However to get to 99.99% level you would have to increase the shares in issue but just about the biggest number you can think of or to the point at which you get bored adding zeros.

Looks like they are starting to understand there is a news void to be filled. Better comments from Cliff and announcing patent grants when they occur rather than when C7 chases them with an email ....

The bucket selling is called Calculus Capital Managed Funds and they hold 1.8 million shares .... sale was reported in the update I get as happening in Feb 19 and was @240k shares .... Calculus total holding is @ 12.85%. So this bucket could sell all of their shares and would still not fall below the 12% threshold that would trigger a TR-1. A’s I said don’t think it is anything to worry about.

C7, I am sure . It has happened this year. Also it shows a negative number in the change in shareholding line ... this would not happen in a placing .... I don’t think it is anything to worry about but probably good to be aware of it. I will get the March end update probably early next week and will update the BB if there is any further change.

C7, a small technical point .... I don’t think it changes your overall point about the commitment of Calculus, but they have reduced their holding slightly .... they hold their position in 2 buckets the VCT bucket (the large core of their holding) and I guess what can be discribed as a more tactical bucket .... the tactical bucket has sold a few hundred thousand shares in the last few months .... not meaningful in the overall scheme of things. The sale is not enough to have tipped them below the reporting threshold hence no TR-1 ... bit can be seen on the various shareholder reporting systems.

C7, It is my main issue with the BOD and I think probably my main point of disagreement with some on this board. I think small but very very important part of managements job is to consistently and effectively communicate with shareholders. All else being equal if there was more information and more faith in management at this point you could make a case for the share price being 10p, 15p maybe I even higher ..... but that faith requires a build up of trust and a certain consistent approach from management. However if we are at 15p an additional raise is much less of an issue than at 5p....This management and they are not alone in this it is many companies, only care about the share price when they need cash. A proper an effective communication strategy results in a consistently higher share price and benefits all shareholders. I don’t think this is a million miles from the position you said you held before the the last AGM ?

Crumbs, do you have any view as to why management don’t seem to bother to keep shareholders up to date with events similar to the ones you highlighted today ? If I am honest it just seems bizzare to me .... it would not be a huge amount of work. Simarlly i think it is bizzare that they did not use the end of Q1 to provide a SCIB1 and Modi 1 trial update. Even if it was something as basic as “we together with Ichor have answered x rounds of questions from the FDA and believe we remain on track for approval”.... I can see no reason not to provide an update other than the BODs perverse lack of interest in communicating with shareholders. We are now 5 months since the delay announcement to SCIB1 most companies would have provided some form of comentary on the process by now. Particularly as a certain timetable was scketched out to new shareholders at the last placement then silence is deafening and completely unnecessary. Any thoughts as to why would be interesting?