Member Info for WeTookPelham

http://en.boerse-frankfurt.de/stock/Scancell_Holdings-share

Crumbs, your (and C7's) post made me curious, not at all sure if I got this correct but looks like 22k shares bought today over in Frankfurt? But at 2 cents? Can someone confirm? Not sure if that is an unusual amount of shares traded either?

Also I didn't get your statement: "...If there was a leak to do with hmm BioNtech... you might think someone who may be a Mainz local might want some off the Boerse...a place that is usually one emptiness of no trades for years on end... ohhh wait!"
I get you were being sarcastic, but I don't get the implication?

Still trying to get cheap shares Scunthorpe? ;)

C7 you said "...Seems like we could be saving them for one RNS, so thats America, China, Japan and Europe granted,...?", not in disagreement with that, but I'm puzzled why they haven't issued individual RNS's about these quite significant bits of patent news? RNS's that might actually help gain more interest in the company and help the SP!?

They were quick to issue an RNS about NOT winning CRUK...which apparently they weren't too "invested" in anyway! I really don't understand Scancell's approach to releasing news? It's strange IMO, and they only seem to like releasing RNS's that come across in a negative way and depress the SP!

Thanks Konar.

Thanks Konar RE China & Japan, not many corners of the world left to conquer!
Apologies in advance though :/ ...as I'm being a bit dense here, but has this news just happened now/recently?

Hi Roses, I think the point I was trying to get to, in a very round about way is best highlighted by the following tweet by scrumpy:
https://twitter.com/Scrumpy222/status/1046453798292656129
It was about what Scancell were presenting at CICON18 (there were three in total on Sept 30th by Scrumpy), I couldn't get my head round the fact it took a shareholder (I assume) to tweet about what Scancell were presenting, why didn't they do it themselves or maybe even RNS what they were presenting?

But also, and probably more importantly, IMO biggish news/statements are often slyly and subtly thrown into the Proactive Presentations - e.g. the FDA situation, or the now infamous "monetization" statement. But looking back now I think the Proactive interviews are used to make (slightly outlandish) claims they don't have to necessarily back up with in the same way the would if it was officially RNS'd (Although saying that, they haven't really met the expectations of those either...IMO)

Just some thoughts (i.e. personal rants) about todays RNS.

Why did they not explain exactly where the extra money was/is being spent? This would have alleviated some concerns today. Was this something that could not be officially disclosed?

Why say the FDA situation is in the same position as it was before Christmas, when in fact Cliff Holloway said (in the proactive interview) it was now with the FDA and the situation had moved on?

This was "another" example of a poorly worded RNS IMO, that leaves people wondering, asking more questions than were answered originally

Also what frustrates me is that we get little bits of news (sometimes often significant) via a sporadic combination of 1) Proactive interviews 2) Tweets/retweets (and not always instigated by Scancell e.g.Scrumpy having to point stuff out), and 3) Very poorly worded and vague RNS's (IMO) which do nothing but lower the SP.

Incidentally i feel (now) that anything Cliff Holloway says needs to be taken with a huge pinch of salt...all IMO.

Rant over...as you were :)

P.s. Thanks for your detailed reply RE funding Inanaco.

Thanks Crumbs.

Apologies, another one of my layman questions, but wasn't it established long ago that there was no way Scancell could afford to run the upcoming trials by themselves? And even if they tried to go down the cash call route it simply would not be enough? So "surely" this money has to be coming from a third party/external source? And as others have mentioned, the two new appointments last week in some way signifies this too?

Although I think its worth clarification from cliff Holloway himself to confirm exactly what the state of play is RE the FDA situation (anyone care to email him?), I don't think he would have said what he said in the Proactive interview if it was not true i.e. it's all been submitted and the onus is on the FDA now. The wording on today's RNS seems like a bit of a cut and paste from a previous update?
But yes hopefully not another government shutdown in the US, Trump has played his hand and lost IMO.

It's as if this interim results RNS was written a while ago? Isn't this RNS is kind of contradicting what Cliff Holloway said in the Proactive interview about the FDA submission? In the RNS it reads like it the situation was as before i.e. "working closely etc etc" but this is no longer the case right? Thoughts?

...the trigger/final jigsaw piece that will get things finally moving in a commercial sense? Just wondering on people's thoughts on this.

Thanks Konar, much appreciated, that is great news.

Isn't TriGrid 2 already being used successfully in other applications/trials?

Can anyone make head or tale of the link crumbs posted?

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?ST=singleline&locale=en_EP&submitted=true&DB=&query=scancell&Submit=Search

Says " Publication info: BRPI0808599 (A2) 2019-01-08" ???

I noticed if you clicked the links under "CPC" (e.g. https://worldwide.espacenet.com/classification?locale=en_EP#!/CPC=A61K2039/53 ) you got a whole load of extra sub info. Makes no sense to me mind you.

Didn't we establish before that Scancell found out about Patent approval info the same time as everyone else?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47007081
Temporary, but hopefully becomes a permanent thing? Should help speed things along.

Ruck, my point was both you and Inanaco have posted some excellent posts today, but the extra "noise" (lMO) just detracts from it, that was all.

Yep, arguing for arguing's sake. The useful and relevant posts are getting lost in the (pointless) crossfire.

As was noted by others, Cliff Holloway mentioned at the end of the proactive interview that all the relevant submissions had now been sent to the FDA, which is great news. Obviously the US government shutdown isn't helpful, but does anyone know what the exact situation is? I found the following article, but it seems to contradict itself a little IMO: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/22/shutdown-leaves-drugmakers-in-dark-on-fda-approval-of-new-treatments.html

"...Despite concerns, the FDA is still working on applications and some drugmakers have received approvals during the shutdown, including California biotech company Exelixis. The FDA approved its drug Cabometyx to treat liver cancer, the company announced last week. Abbott Laboratories also won approval for a device to treat heart defects.

Other companies, like British pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, told CNBC that they are "not aware of any impact on its submissions" and are "closely monitoring the government shutdown to understand the impacts on the FDA."

Hi C7, yes I alluded to this last night just after the midnight results came out, I thought that not being selected would actually help speed up the commercial/partnership side of things, and that now the CRUK element has been removed from the equation it actually helps clears things up, in a big way. That's my thinking anyway.