Member Info for WeTookPelham

"...or those privy to that info have an advantage".
The argument I've been trying to make but crumbs said it better.

https://www.fca.org.uk/markets/best-practice-note-identifying-controlling-and-disclosing-inside-information

"4. Dealing with leaks
The procedures in this note should minimise the risk of leaks of inside information, but deliberate or accidental leaks can still happen. For example, you could inadvertently disclose inside information without expressly mentioning the facts, but by communicating something which allows the recipient to guess it. So, advising a journalist that a forthcoming announcement is ‘market sensitive’ before giving further information - even if not mentioning the factual detail - is likely to lead to speculation.

We recommend having contingency plans for handling cases where inside information leaks before the planned announcement date. If there is a leak, the inside information should be released to the market as soon as possible using an appropriate method, even if this requires an announcement during market hours."

Ah the link works for me. Here's the text anyway:
"
"Nottingham University: Coronavirus
(asked on 13th July 2020) - View Source
Questioner
Chi Onwurah Portrait
Chi Onwurah
(Labour - Newcastle upon Tyne Central)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, what assessment he has made of the length of time it has taken Nottingham University's Scancell COVID-19 Vaccine group to receive Government funding in comparison to similar groups in (a) Oxford and (b) Imperial universities.

Answered by
Amanda Solloway Portrait
Amanda Solloway
Government Whip, Lord Commissioner of HM Treasury
This question was answered on 20th July 2020
No such assessment has been made on the length of time taken. The government understands the urgency of the response to COVID-19 and set up a rapid response R&D fund, to accelerate research proposals into the disease. All applications to the UKRI-DHSC rapid response call are assessed on their own merits and awards made so far can be found at:

https://mrc.ukri.org/funding/browse/ukri-nihr-covid-19/ukri-nihr-covid-19-rolling-call/?_ga=2.186583657.1164498350.1594986614-294529872.1594986614.

The funding calls and processes for Scancell, Oxford and Imperial have different requirements and are of different scales, therefore the timings required to make a proper and fair assessment should not be compared."
"

I think empty ends point is regarding the company preempting any potential news leaks? EE?

Missed or forgot about this:
https://www.parallelparliament.co.uk/question/72904/nottingham-university-coronavirus

Very useful Chester18, thanks.

UK gov didn't give a hoot about alternative vaccines during the midst of the pandemic, they sure aren't going to give a hoot now. Screw them I say.

"
Visibly frustrated at times while giving evidence, Dame Kate said she was "baffled" by the government's decision-making regarding the development of new vaccines.

"To begin with I thought it was a lack of experience of officials since we don't have a lot of people within Whitehall that understand vaccines, relationships with industry, all of that," she said.

"But actually, I'm beginning to think this is deliberate government policy - just not to invest and just not to support the sector.
"

https://news.sky.com/story/mps-told-covid-jabs-are-not-up-to-scratch-by-former-chief-of-uks-vaccination-programme-12758669

So we know Scancell are due to take a 3rd scan by the Macmillan patient today (when we are made officially aware is a different matter of course). But I was wondering about how the scans/results (not just today's though) would affect outside interest. We know now BionTech have a strong interest, would the likes of them and no doubt other interested parties think, "hang on these preliminary results look good, we don't won't our big pharma competitors to get the jump on us" i.e. let's make an offer ASAP.

What I mean is what are likely sequence of events here?

We know that clearly BionTech are following very closely the progress, surely other big pharma too. GenMab for example is also no doubt paying attention.

Ill informed and hasty question, noticed the Biogen/Eisa Alzheimer's drug is a Mab drug, could Scancells mab products also help in this area also?

...but can confirm buys showing as sells here on lse.

Err... has it?

MattRempit's post sums this up perfectly. This goverment policy is somewhat of of a non issue (IMO), especially where Scancell are atm and how they are progressing.
Don't forget they didn't show any kind of urgency to back Covidity.

Anwyay...The SP action over the last week or so is far more interesting than any "potential" portion of a £22.5m of government money. IMO.

Knowing past history i.e. covid vaccines, I wouldn't get your hopes up. UK gov will (IMO) have already marked out with bio's/organisations they will want to work with, and wouldn't be remotely suprised if those same companies had links with MP's in the party.

And anyway, as botski says, 22.5m is paltry. Scancell is far better off with private money IMO.

(Typo...and reiteration for good measure)...
"You should have been* busy buying, instead of being busy de-ramping....oh sorry I mean "offering balance"."

RatcliffeWriter's 10:45 post has IMO nailed it.

I also didn't see a descipible post , or for that matter a post that indicates any kind infiltration from an investor. I was actually wondering where this was coming from. Also those that are long terms holders you'd think would not even dream of doing such a thing. There would very little benefit anyway to doing so.

Was it the "Scanxiety" term that triggered this? Did people actually think Scanxiety was a reference to Scancell?
Surely it was obvious it was an almagamation of scan and anxiety? Even without Wildforces link I could see it was
terminilogy used for those undergoing treatment (for any ailment). I.e. completely independent of Scancell.

But as RW say, the macmillian thread and IMO more importantly it being backed up at the AGM has really put doomies noses out of joint so are now using the moral high ground as an argument.

You should have busy buying, instead of being busy de-ramping....oh sorry I mean "offering balance".

"I worry that the results were false last time as they were so incredible".

Wow.

Apologies, I got that wrong, I saw the thread had moved to p.3, but the latest post was by someone else asking Trish about the progress. I didn't realise it was the very first post by Trish at the top of each page. Sorry for the confusion all.

I stand corrected about my previous standing corrected!

So maybe there will still be enforced radio silence?