Member Info for Wigwammer

Chelsea - I didn’t say the staff are not needed. I said the staff are not needed to get to the scib1 trial result. Given CH has been at pains to say that the priority is getting trial data, it is odd that he is willing to raise costs and compromise the possibility of getting to that endpoint (the modi trial has already been sacrificed). One answer is - he is expecting payback from the hires over a shorter time frame. I wasn’t surprised by the GC result and nor should anyone have been who reads the output from the company.

In the same way that SCLP were correct to downplay GC in their recent material, investors should feel confident they are correctly highlighting the areas of most interest - namely, TCR. The hires at the beginning of the week were a surprise - the company needs to preserve cash and the hires are not required (happy to stand corrected) to complete the priority goal of getting the initial phase of the scib1 trial completed. A reasonable explanation of why CH would compromise the plan - by adding to cost - is if someone has given him a decent steer that an inflection point may be near - but SCLP need to get their house in order first. Fingers crossed :) Here is the list of moditope priorities again from most recent presentation, scib1 trial is the other big one: - Research collaboration to develop T-cell based therapies established with BioNTech - License agreed with ISA Pharmaceuticals for development of Amplivant® Modi-1 conjugate therapy - GMP manufacturer contracted for production of Modi-1/Amplivant® conjugate - Modi-1 clinical study expected to start in CY19 - Homocitrullinated peptides under evaluation for inclusion in new Modi-2 vaccine targeting multiple solid tumours - Strong Patent protection - Shortlisted for CRUK Grand Challenge award

Gold price moving in right direction, pox successfully moving to commercial production, stockpiled material ready for processing, potential for 3rd party use of excess capacity, some moderation of production expectation but capex expected to more than half - substantially better than expected. All good reasons to anticipate reduction in net debt and ongoing price recovery. We shareholders are having a nice time, especially those who bought near the lows. But what about those with the sub 3p targets? While stocks are falling left right and centre - they used all their qualifications and financial prowess to call down one of the few stocks that has risen considerably. Time to use one of the other usernames? The door of discussion remains open, as always :)

DA - the RNS was non regulatory. The company does not believe the information contained is material or price sensitive. With regard to GC - this fits with the position of the company given it’s recent official releases - GC was not a project near the top of their priorities. Of course, that doesn’t stop people reading whatever significance they want into something or dealing on the back of it. Hope that helps :)

It’s a non regulatory rns - they didn’t deem it material. Same as Mondays rns. Bottom line - material triggers remain the same as this time last week 1) scib1 ind progress 2) potential for commercial progress on Biontech collaboration. This is what the company has been guiding to in recent official releases - some listened, some didn’t. ATB :)

Production guidance for 2019 has edged down slightly from 500k oz to a mid of 475k - but imagine the market is warming to the potential use of spare pox capacity for 3rd party treatment and that capex guidance is lower than some expected at sub $50m. Onwards and hopefully upwards :)

RP - yes, they put the GC at the bottom of the list and they likely did it for a reason. Perhaps they were deprioiritising it, but hopefully they have learnt something and are trying to set the bar low. ATB :)

To repeat. You haven’t “said” it is big and in the bag. You repeatedly “suggest” it is big and in the bag. Under promise and over deliver. Hopefully the company has learnt something :)

I was at the agm. I don’t recall any great excitement about GC. I recall much relief that modi1 pharmacology was progressing. I have read the article, prior to the tweet - fingers crossed something has changed. The moderation of expectation has been pretty obvious. But guess what? The market reacts better when something positive and unexpected happens. Think about that next time you suggest it’s all big and in the bag. Hope that helps :)

Or more accurately.. listen to Lindy “underplaying” the GC in Feb 2018. ATB :)

I’m pretty sure you own the shares - they currently have a value above zero - so you have got something.. I have stated what I hope - not what trinity/sclp are guiding me to think. Fingers crossed they are under promising with the expectation of over delivering, though that hasn’t been the history! Perhaps they are learning. GLA :)

Crumbs - I very much hope you’re right. I hope it wins and is a very valuable project for holders. But all you’re really doing is telling us how much you have to lose, rather than demonstrating that trinity/sclp are wrong to be cautious in their most recent statements. GLA :)

Two lol’s?! Come on fella - give us content instead. If I win the lottery, the winnings will be left right and centre in my mind. Based on current expectations though, I’m deprioritising it.

Hi WF - no. I’m suggesting they know more than us. For a start, THEY presented to the panel.

In order - TCR top of the pops, homocitrullination rising, GC an afterthought.. - Research collaboration to develop T-cell based therapies established with BioNTech - License agreed with ISA Pharmaceuticals for development of Amplivant® Modi-1 conjugate therapy - GMP manufacturer contracted for production of Modi-1/Amplivant® conjugate - Modi-1 clinical study expected to start in CY19 - Homocitrullinated peptides under evaluation for inclusion in new Modi-2 vaccine targeting multiple solid tumours - Strong Patent protection - Shortlisted for CRUK Grand Challenge award

Crumbs - without wanting to labour the point, why has scancell allowed trinity to downplay the value of the project then? Why is GC now bottom of the list of triggers when scancell present moditope to potential investors? Perhaps something has changed in recent weeks, I hope so, but it seems evident from the more recent noises from the company that modi2 has been upregulated, and GC downregulated!

Ruck - yes, that makes sense, I think. TF - the trinity note (and probably sclp) downplays the idea that GC is an “amazing project” from the perspective of an sclp shareholder.

TF - with respect, it doesn’t take a great deal of cunning to work out that downplaying the asset may be motivated by an increased concern about not winning it. Ruck - if it has limited financial impact then I don’t see why any associated fall isn’t met by a consequent “pull up”. ATB

I tend to agree, though again am happy to be proven wrong. The thing they know that we don’t is how well the panel interview went in Q4 - it coincides well with the change in tone.

So if Biontech are successful and demonstrate a capability to marshal the same CD4+ t-cells as modi1, this will drastically improve the chances of the technology getting to market. The product will not have to rely on multiple immune system processes occurring to get the end result, the adjuvant functioning as expected, or them getting the pharmacology right with modi1. That’s not to suggest they won’t get it bang on right with the latter, but clearly it derisks the story. Biontech will still have to pay sclp substantial sums to use their tech. Really the only difference between the TCR treatment and modi1 is cost to the system - the patient won’t know the difference. If the end product is sufficiently efficacious, the price will be paid I suspect. Key therefore is to get substantial terms off biontech. Not sure if there is potential to develop ways of developing TCR therapy more cost effectively which could compete price wise with the modi1 vaccine. Happy to be slaughtered if all of that is naive - my intention is to highlight how far the Biontech TCR story goes to derisk the chances of sclp technology getting to market, NOT highlight the risks to a modi1 trial. But they need to get the terms right. I also understand that modi1 is just one of multiple potential products. ATB :)