The latest Investing Matters Podcast with Jean Roche, Co-Manager of Schroder UK Mid Cap Investment Trust has just been released. Listen here.
...for the new business development officer perhaps?
IMO it's bizarre and totally inconsistent what Scancell decide announce, or not in this case.
There's not even a tweet?
Apologies I see this was already posted.
LinkedIn:
"Delighted our review article “What do cancer-specific T cells ‘see’?“, published in #DiscoveryImmunology, has been selected for inclusion in the ‘High Impact Collection’, highlighting research and reviews from across the #BritishSocietyforImmunology portfolio of journals.
To read the article head over to: https://lnkd.in/eRpTsF2F or https://lnkd.in/ea_Pirae"
Agree RW, it's the confluence of attention that interests me.
As mentioned previously we have had a mention in Motley Fool, Vox Markets, Zak Mir, and now second mention by Zak Mir in the space of a week.
Whilst all of them are questionable to say the least, the fact all three have (re) picked up on Scancell is interesting.
RE Zak Mirs latest analysis, he's seeing a price target of 22p by end of the month. Whilst Zak's track record is very hit and miss I do believe he called the last big spike correctly?
Not remotely patronising.
Being quoted 11.4p to buy 1000 shares or 10000 shares atm.
It's been an unusual start to the morning with the trades?
Whilst it's quiet, just wondered what everyone was seeing as the closing price? My broker showing over 12% up on the close, any delayed trades/Uncrossed trades spotted by others?
Also, whilst Motley Fool do get a bad rep, they do have a big following, I wonder how much the Friday action/volume was down to that?
Let's not forget the Vox boys but also a mention by Zak Mir on his chart breakers videos last week also.
Https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/seagan-puts-16b-merck-partnered-adc-back-burner
@burble, forgot to say, you've brilliantly highlighted my earlier point regarding RNS titles.
The titles they use are only understandable to those who actually know already about Scancell and their pipeline. If you are not already aware of Scancell you won't have clue what those titles mean. Even those who with a science background would still need to delve into the RNS and "then" probably would still need to look at the Scancell website to understand what the products are!
Modi, Moditope, Covidity, Glymab etc. doesn't mean anything to anyone outside of those already in the know. They should be explaining what the product is in the RNS title!!!
It's like the only want to RNS the absolute bear minimum they can get away with and not highlight/advertise the company to other people. I find this truly bizarre.
Maybe EE is right, maybe they just don't care about PI money?
"...it illustrates for me that Scancell's science is deeper than most observers can go ."
I've made this pont several times in a roundabout way regarding RNS which the vox boys highlighted in their own particular way. Why don't Scancell at the very least just give the RNS descriptive titles i.e. "Modi 1 'cancer vaccine' trial shows highly encouraging initial trial results".
I.e. they very rarely give the RNS title any kind of context.
And also they could dumb down the actual RNS details for everyone also, to make more approachable for all, i.e.non science types.
It's like they don't want the wider investment market to see them?? It's bizarre IMO.
"...EE, Sorry you won't read this..."
Yet you still decide to post it.
Hmmm 🤔 okay.
Https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/merck-still-seeking-ma-even-after-108b-takeover-prometheus
2tyke = 🤡
Https://calculuscapital.com/scancells-cancer-vaccine-modi-1-makes-progress/
"Scancell’s cancer vaccine Modi-1 makes progress
July 31, 2023
- Scancell’s phase I ModiFY trial assessing its cancer vaccine Modi-1 in various difficult-to-treat cancer types makes progress following a positive safety review which included no safety concerns and has been well tolerated in patients so far.
- The trial is now open for its expansion cohorts in combination with checkpoint inhibitors (CPI).
- ****The first patient to be assessed has shown a tumour regression at their 8 week radiological assessment.****
"
That last point really needs shouting about IMO.
No worries, but thank marcusl2 I just copied and pasted his post as per his suggestion.