Scancell Share Discussion Threads

[drdobson] 18/9/2017 09:40

Morning Lozan
Yes never tempted by feeding the tRHYPE hound as the ASTUTE can read NANA like a penny book.
When HE is rumbled by ALL IN and FUNDING is NO ISSUE he tries to claim moral high ground OR baffles everyone with inane ramblings about science.

His arrogance,lack of personal and communication skills,and crypto babble on the science should raise a BIG RED FLAG.IGNORE.

Most people just AVOID his ADVICE and save money by npbeing ASTUTE

[oldnotwise] 18/9/2017 09:30

C7
In fairness I think it would be wise to sit down and work out what sort of strategy you want to apply to your funds in the future.
In essence are you an investor/Trader/Gambler/Adrenaline Junkie or whatever.
Once you know that then you're in a position to think what to do next.
There's no right and wrong answers to this, and things can change, but the main consideration is what you want to achieve with your available "pot".
There's only one person who can answer that , and that's you!
ATB

[chelsea35] 18/9/2017 09:08

""straightforward""!!! Hmmm, all i do know is I would have been much better off buying 250k at 6p. Buying in at 41p has dictated my stratagy really, from day one. Selling at 28p would have left me with losses at that point. Thanks anyway, but we have had numerous conversations on the same thing. "Buying on the dips" another one that is questionable, our chart looks a bit like a ski slope!!!

[drdobson] 18/9/2017 09:06

ONW Nicely balanced post.Wish I had enough money to spread the risk but you give wise words.

[oldnotwise] 18/9/2017 08:23

C7 Apols
The answer I would give to your question is quite straightforward.
The notoriety of AIM Baby Bios should IMO set off warning bells when an investor decides to BUY.
Why?
Because the failure rate for such companies is high, the journey to commercialisation can be erratic to say the least.
An investor in revenue positive companies is looking for the dividends (Income) payable to shareholders to begin to flow and increase over time as the company's profits grow.
This is why any investor in even a company like Scancell is in it for .... ie they're looking for PROFITS to be derived from the successful development of the IP.
As the business that Scancell is in is high risk most INVESTORS (rather than speculative traders) would expect to have as many failures in their portfolios as winners (and that's an optimistic way of putting it), and so anyone who is an investor (rather than an out and out gambler) would want to have a spread of such stocks forming part of a larger portfolio, and even the sector involvement in Biotechnology would only form a (relatively) small proportion of the overall portfolio's value. The idea being simply that many baby bios will fail so hopefully with good research and a bit of luck some will blossom and produce that dividend income that gives the shares real value.
So for an INVESTOR a "Buy and Hold" policy makes sense, but that buy and hold requires time and other investments to spread the risk.
This is the reason that I've always been wary of the "all in" and other "Gambler" mentality approaches that have been propagated in SCLP as The share is high risk and by definition not suitable for anyone who has a limited investment pot who wishes to INVEST rather than GAMBLE.
If "Buy and Hold" doesn't suit the means/investment strategy of an INDIVIDUAL I'd like to suggest saying that it's stupid isn't necessarily correct, it certainly isn't stupid for my approach.
Hope this clarifies my position.
AIMO
ATB

[chelsea35] 18/9/2017 07:50

ONW, you never actually replied to my 11743.

[chelsea35] 18/9/2017 07:40

oldnotwise, you engaged me yesterday, felt i wanted to end that rift as i have tried to do before. I sincerely hope that was your intention to, lets see.

[inanaco] 17/9/2017 19:57

Wig .. understands you better now Loz

[inanaco] 17/9/2017 19:50

ONW

At any point after the events you can point fingers .. because its all down to what Scancell do and what the market does ... which we have no control over,

Now, you claim that folks listened .... so why did the market fall ?? I have never posted a negative ...

BB has very little impact ... indeed pretty well non at all on the share price .. cannot imagine Helium or calculus reading it .. and the majority don't want to wade through the majority of posts that are just not relevant.

After all they can read RNS and listen and watch Scancell Vids.

So lets not hype the Value of the BB to suit your games ..........

[the real lozan] 17/9/2017 19:49

O N W et al -
Good move NOT to enter into a 'spat / argument' with der TEA LEAF
As everyone knows ='It always ends up in tears'
HIS

[inanaco] 17/9/2017 19:27

Rat a Tat Tat ... Not mine Puritas
Free money .. it was 8p to 60p .. LOL
all in at 8p to 15p ... went well chap ...
You seem to forget after your 27p sell it went to 38p ...
That's trading .... if i remember you didn't buy the 00 at 22p ...then what happened ?

[inanaco] 17/9/2017 19:24

Strange Loz ........... I cannot remember how many times i have said its a game of poker, ... maybe you missed that ref 11747 ....

[oldnotwise] 17/9/2017 19:23

Inanaco
I won't start a spat about your personal situation.
What I will say is is that things seem to have changed from some sources and there's a rather distasteful attempt to "Rewrite History" here.
Remember all the posters who extolled the " go all in" "free money" and "Rat Tat Tat" nonsense?
Then have a think about some others who mentioned the potential problems of such a "Risk" strategy.
THEN think of some who've switched alliances and now say that the original Gung Ho stuff was bad...
Stated investment policies have changed radically from some posters, but some have stayed true to their originally stated views. Those who have attempted to change what actually unfolded need to look inward and maybe sit around and quieten down a bit.
AIMO
ATB

[inanaco] 17/9/2017 19:15

Wig ... no idea .. you can never take the Moral High Road ... when talking about buying and selling, in shares as The last in, will always lose in a falling market.

[inanaco] 17/9/2017 19:11

ONW ... I started at 8p .. problem that consumes Loz, he conveniently forgets i hold a commercial property estate, which every body knew about back in 2013, thus i may have moved all funds into Scancell from my share account, but that's only 5% of investment assets, his problem is being selective in what he posts. Which is way i always try and find the posts concerned,

Loz has only ever averaged down....... or traded out at a loss

[inanaco] 17/9/2017 19:04

Bit of maths ... and risk
Averaging down is plausible, actually you can use Ivy's post .. £10,000 at .3 share price profit thus his first buy at approx .75 (2 year sp) and his buying at the lows at .0975 to achieve an average of .2
indicates approx 5.35 ratio ... thus he must have bought £3750 first time, on the second buy, £16250
to take his capital cost to £20,000 to profit £10,000 (.2p to .3p rise)
When its laid out like that .. it gets interesting as you can see the huge disparity in risk in trying to save £3750 initial investment ..

[wigwammer] 17/9/2017 19:01

"but he didn't he had to trade down from a high average.."Interesting.So where does the "astute" bit come in?

[oldnotwise] 17/9/2017 18:57

Well... remember all the taunts about my sale at 27p (which was an inaccurate level but for this purpose I'll accept that price)?
That approach cost me CGT but that's one of the few taxes I'm happy to pay if it's unavoidable.
My original strategy was to hold my original investment..... but when it's possible to sell and retain a holding subsidised by profit (the illusive "free shares" strategy) then I took it and have the option to rebuild if I wish, or trade if the options present themselves.
The core holding I had after the "27p sale" is what I will retain as my "in to the end" so that adjusted my "buy and hold" because (as I posted on many occasions) I had invested above my theoretical self imposed limit in the first place.
I really shouldn't have bought more than my original value limit, but I did (and posted that I had) but with hindsight I'm pleased I did.
However, even if I don't agree with an "all in" approach it's not for me to decide whether it's stupid or not for other people.
All in my opinion
ATB

[the real lozan] 17/9/2017 18:54

The DIFFERENCE is TEA LEAF
I wasn't deliberately DECIEVING anyone =
YOU = were / are

[chelsea35] 17/9/2017 18:36

Looking back i am sure that occurred. Mind it wont be just inanaco that has ever done that.