Member Info for TommyFlowers

I am not sure if anyone is aware but SCLP is in the AXHEAL Index (AIM Healthcare Index) .... so I thought it would be interesting to look at how we have done against the sector average over time .... before you ask Ratty what is below are facts not opinion.

Total Return over 1 year SCLP -60.57% AXHEAL -7.05
Total Return over 2 years SCLP -60.23% AXHEAL +9.7%
Total Return over 3 years SCLP -68.46% AXHEAL +42.15%
Total Return over 4 years SCLP -77.62 AXHEAL +47.87%
Total Return over 5 years SCLP -82.35% AXHEAL +74.92%
Total Return over 6 years SCLP - 84.60% AXHEAL +131.65%
Total Return over 7 years SCLP - 51.22% AXHEAL +144.74%
Total Return over 8 years SCLP -19.26% AXHEAL +128.98%

Make of this what you will and it is open to lots of interpretation but on a cumulative basis over the last 8 years there is no time period in which SCLP outperforms its peer group on AIM. We have seen huge advances in the science during that period yet no outperformance .... you know why I think that is but I will leave you to draw your own conclusions. If anyone is interested I can break out the index ... it will be a bit of work and take sometime but I am happy to do it if it is useful.

Ray * should be does not change my thesis .... need to get away to my bed.

Chester .... Amen to that.

Ray, I suggest you look at the values of those deals, focus on the cash raised not just market cap at IPO .... although it does change my thesis if you look at total deal value ..... one of them I know well as I was peripherally involved ... also I would quibble over your definition of recent ....

In the scheme of big pharma deals these are minor league I think that is indisputable ..... Photocopier reference was humours but like much humour it contains a grain of truth.

C7, i Am going to leave you alone as I know you are fragile .... You could not even answer the question at what level, and what would you need to see in order to top up again?

Come on Knowlesi be fair .... last year CH renegotiated the lease on the photocopier.... you are spot on about their lack of deal making experience..... it is minor league stufff ... do they have the ability, who knows - they certainly don’t have the track record.

C7, i asked you to be kind enough to provide us with some forward looking views and predictions with respect to pertinent issues relating to SCLP.... unsurprisingly... not a dicky bird in that regard. Maybe you will come up with some thoughts tomorrow .... i live in hope , it would be good to know what you think.

Inanco,

So we have good science ... agreed .... do we have sensible funding available ? What is sensible funding in your view .... if equity is used do you know the implied cost of capital to SCLP at a single digit share price ? Why have sensible deals not been made yet ? .... history is littered with companies that had great science but were unable to commercialise it. The two cannot be divorced from each other as much as you would like that to be the case.

To my mind if you really believe in the science you should want to see the highest quality of management and corporate infrastructure put around it ... you seem to struggle to acknowledge that SCLP management is not best in class (truthfully they are not even best on AIM).... I think our science deserves best in class management don't you ?

I agree with TF .... there are a many issues that we need to contend with but the key to getting a virtuous cycle going is the FDA go ahead for SCIB1 trial ...... unless there is something fundamentally wrong with Trigrid 2 (i am not suggesting there is) you would suspect approval has to be measured in weeks, given the length of time that has already elapsed.

TF, thank you for your observations ... that was indeed my intention but given it has not been perceived that way by all may not have been well written, going back to reread it now.

RR, intention is not to censor it is to stimulate ..... but given you have viewed it as the former I will reread my post to see if it does in fact come across as intended. C7, Ratty among others like to oppose positions, often without any justification and then never provide a reasoned alternative view or perspective ... I wanted to see if we could not break that cycle.

Cars, who am I to judge ? I am a poster on this board just like you and I can judge any post or poster in the same way you have rended a judgement on my post. I hope you see the irony?

C7, No not intended to be patronising .... if it feels that way it maybe because I have stuck a chord. I want to know what C7 thinks about some of the issues ... positive or negative ... I want to see a degree of critical thought ..... leave it up to you to think about it ... you will be treated with respect. We know what you hope for and you are a glass half full sort of guy .... do be honest I have no idea what you think about any of the issues. That is the starting point for a real debate. For example at what level and what do you need to see happen before you would average down again?

C7, since I have been posting here I was trying to think if you have actually made a single forward looking statement or expressed a view on either the science or the commercial aspects of the company. I don’t recall a single one.... is it possible that you have posted 35,000 times and actually have any views ? I know you are big on “hope” but I am talking about critical thinking, analysis, situational awareness.

So come on C7 prove me wrong ... let’s have some views on the science, on the BOD, on the share price what ever you want. See I think you are scared to offer a view because you are worried about the reaction you will get, you are worried that you will be judged or maybe you are not confident in your views.... I promise we will be kind and your views will be welcomed and as valuable as the next person. So come on join the debate because you and I know hope is not a strategy.

C7, deal was singed a year ago ... they have not even started designing the trial yet. You want to move to the science.... then help us out and a time line on that process please in your experience ?

Rats, that is a fact ... they have not even moved to pre clinical yet .... you tell me when you think we get our first read out ? But I know you don't actually have a view on anything do you ... Tell me in your opinion how long it is before we get a read out on SCIBII ? No ? I am sure we wont here a peep on that.

It is a fact that it will take many many months before we get trial data from SCIBII .... go on be brave Ratty prove me wrong.

hmmm .... not much progress on SCIBII according to this .... going to be a while before we get any data

www.cancerresearchuk.org/sites/default/files/cdd_pipeline_april_2019.pdf

Ray, not sure anyone has any major concerns about the science ... the reason SCLP is at its lowest ever shareprice on a diluted weighted basis is not because of the science is it.

So if we all agree it is not the science then the issue is the management ? no? Management can be changed / improved clearly if there was an issue with the science nothing could be done about that?

Inan, you boxed yourself in with your GBP3 prediction in 2015 .... I like your tennis joke by the way and I am going to ascribe your to over optimism (I wont call it a mistake as it is clear you don’t make them). I think it is fair to say for all of your sophisticated knowledge of scancell you have trouble in translating that in to what it may or may not do for the share price. Nevertheless, we are where we are and we can all benifit from the undervalued share price, on that I suspect we can agree. TTFN

Inanco, so Moditope reduced the value of SCIB1 ... My focus is on your valuation of SCIB1 in 2015 and how it is 54x more than the current shareprice .... yet you dont seem able to provide a reason for that disconnect .... it would seem obvious to me that it must be management .... but you dont seem able to bring yourself to that conclusion.