Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Scancell Hldgs LSE:SCLP London Ordinary Share GB00B63D3314 ORD 0.1P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  +0.00p +0.00% 10.75p 10.50p 11.00p 10.75p 10.75p 10.75p 50,243 07:44:45
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology 0.0 -4.5 -1.4 - 33.55

Scancell Hldgs (SCLP) Latest News

More Scancell Hldgs News
Scancell Hldgs Takeover Rumours

Scancell Hldgs (SCLP) Share Charts

1 Year Scancell Hldgs Chart

1 Year Scancell Hldgs Chart

1 Month Scancell Hldgs Chart

1 Month Scancell Hldgs Chart

Intraday Scancell Hldgs Chart

Intraday Scancell Hldgs Chart

Scancell Hldgs (SCLP) Discussions and Chat

Scancell Hldgs Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
22/1/201810:16Using immunology to fight cancer.13,333
16/10/201619:04Scancell short thread1
16/9/201613:20Could this be the end of cancer?750
22/8/201607:20Question11
16/8/201407:47Using immunology to fight cancer (LTH W/O Rose Tints - Free Speech Thread)161

Add a New Thread

Scancell Hldgs (SCLP) Most Recent Trades

Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
09:19:1110.5412,5001,317.75O
09:04:0110.72942100.98O
08:24:4710.729,215988.03O
08:20:0210.8827,5862,999.98O
View all Scancell Hldgs trades in real-time

Scancell Hldgs (SCLP) Top Chat Posts

DateSubject
22/1/2018
08:20
Scancell Hldgs Daily Update: Scancell Hldgs is listed in the Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker SCLP. The last closing price for Scancell Hldgs was 10.75p.
Scancell Hldgs has a 4 week average price of 10.50p and a 12 week average price of 10.38p.
The 1 year high share price is 16.75p while the 1 year low share price is currently 9.63p.
There are currently 312,058,098 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 325,162 shares. The market capitalisation of Scancell Hldgs is £33,546,245.54.
10/1/2018
12:04
the real lozan: rHatton on M F F F = "Frustrating lack of response by the share price yet again. Funding holding everything back here." The WISER, more ASTUTE.. are NOT surprised by the "lack of response by the share price YET again".... NOR are the WISER, more ASTUTE "Frustrated" by such. I posted recently, directing a few posts to = "Newbies and prospective investors here" There have been NONE. For any REAL movement in S P, this will take 'New money' or the transfer of 'existing moneies.... already invested elsewhere....{ Old money if you will} to 'switch' to SCLP. Old money.. is already 'market WISE', wary and 'experienced' NOT to be fooled by the 'trHYPE orchestra, led by the trHYPE CONductor' who have been playing the same 'tune of FAILURE' for 5 years or more. Old money does not care to 'associate' with a share where a 'spiv lout' corrupts other forums, LIES, and makes FALSE CLAIMS... E.G. = " FUNDING is NOT an issue here" . Truth is -Nappy has TOTALLY misread the ability of the 'market' to spot a 'wrong-un' when they see one. Nappy'n'co are the biggest detriment to this share FUNDING REMAINS a MAJOR issue here.{ Even if Nappy CLAIMS it isn't}
30/12/2017
14:46
drdobson1: ONW-Personally thought what a great post. I have been thinking along same lines re Inanaco.Is he a lot cleverer than I have given him credit for. Create the impression of being a long term holder but all the time is he has been trading SCLP-probably only revealed when his ego could not cope with the beating it was taking from the declining share price and he thought I have to be seen as a much better investor/trader than the ASTUTE. On the VAL board he was called a shorter and that he and C7 were part of a boiler room crew.Well I thought that a load of nonsense but perhaps he is a secret trader as you say that stock is a lot more volatile than here. Good traders are often perceived as being devious and only out for themselves and he certainly fits that bill By portraying himself as a self taught science guru he has sought to distract from his game plan which is to destroy investor sentiment and cause maximum bulletin board disharmony. He probably wants to get the SCLP share price to fall so he can buy and trade in fact he may not have much of a holding at all. He is as cunning as a cartload of monkeys and slippery as an eel and has me totally fooled or am I being too kind t9 him. Anyway all have a happy new year
20/12/2017
13:59
agema: Tosh, Great news cannot be too late to raise a share price. Great news raises it period. The problem is, as I reported at the time, two fold. Firstly. No details of the cost to Scancell or the dilution to Scancell to buy back the data. Nothing gets sold or partnerships without data. So in a roundabout way. The data is the ip. Good news gets fully released with as much info as possible. Bad news gets covered up in detail and just the headline gets released. Which is what has happened here. So no one knows how good or bad the deal is, but it points to a costly deal. Secondly, all the big pharmas have looked at the data and decided not to participate. Despite major moves by the board, particularly in America. Still no big boy interest either side of the pond. You only go to charities as a last resort. As big pharmas pay bigger, if they are interested. This is why the share price has not moved. As I predicted on the day of the RNS. Despite the usual Rampers giving it the big one.
20/12/2017
12:53
rhatton: Tosh, what was your take on the CRUK tie up? I have a feeling that they will most likely be going back to the US and saying here’s the validation now can we have the money? But given the share price reaction there is still a lot of dilution to come as a result. I think they expected a better reaction to be honest. Something could still be coming regarding moditope but unless that results in a drastically higher share price then I can’t see how scancell escape without massive dilution. From the AGM recording it was apparent that the BOD are aware of this too. Almost worth waiting until the SCIB2 results are out then getting the money after there’s concrete proof that it helps check point inhibitors. I don’t want to wait 2+ years and nor does the market!
20/12/2017
10:48
rhatton: Agema what was apparent at the AGM was the need to validate the tech to raise the share price and make the company more enticing to investors. The way I see it, two ways actually, has the CRUK partnership provided that validation that a US investor was looking for? Also has the CRUK partnership increased the share price enough to minimise dilution. So in answer to the above I can’t tell regarding the first part but I’d hazardous a guess no for the second part. So maybe they wait longer to go back to the US for the cash whilst trying to pin a deal on moditope to raise the share price? That is a possibility, but again means more delays to SCIB1 trial. At least 2019 will mark SCIB2 into trails, that is certain. But also a long way away!
15/12/2017
13:01
rhatton: I must admit that this with further thought is an absolutely great way of D risking the vaccine but it’s almost as if yes it is validation but in a sense that validation won’t really come through until the results are out and as I said we are looking at 2020 effect at the moment we are Looking at potentially going back to US investors to ask for the SCIB1 one money for the share price of 14p. The other side of me is hoping that there is it least something else coming in the next few months which will increase the share price further
30/11/2017
19:33
chelsea35: Tarquin, Hopefully this will be the last time i have to correct you. I don"t have to repeat the constant digs in your post, yesterday, Ruck Rover, Barbelfisher and Rats felt the need to pull you up on it. After receiving 8 very quick recs you still failed to "hear" what Ruck was saying. It is obvious to all, but seemingly not for you. Each time i have topped up recently you say.....""IF you did buy"",,,,,You say you love discussions, BS....you just react with flaying red cards and the filter button........."a control issue, if ever" . It would be a welcome surprise if you ever ventured to start a discussion of your own, rather than disect every word i say and make it into an issue. The comment re bluerose posted at 3 in the morning in the context of how the BB dismissed any negative comments was added with even Smilers comments about timelines were dismissed completely. I actually tongue in cheek said we should remember how 30 posters would descend on bluerose willing to cut his throat for suggesting we were over valued at this stage and there were many other biotech shares more attractive as an investment. Nobody will have forgotten how he provoked such a mass response, but the point is it is not whether it was 10 or 50, it was a reminder of how the BB responded to anything other than buy buy buy. Whilst i have been buying....and no i didn"t say i bought 50k yesterday!!!......wrong again, i have posted on issues that have seen our share price decimated and asked others for their opinions. I never get any, still people stray from saying anything honest as to their own opinions, largely. Now we have inanaco posting as a Professor and anybody that cannot debate the science with him is not worthy of having an opinion. Can you not see the parody in that alone?? Can you really not see how few "newbies" venture forward to the BB?? And do you think the BB offers any sentiment to others as to what the BOD are trying to achieve?? And have you not noticed just how many have fled from the share or the BB to Twitter just to discuss the share without inane outbursts from you and the Professor?? History just repeats itself, nothing is learnt. You agreeing with everything Inanaco posts is blind, you don"t even understand what he posts, nobody does.There are numerous other issues that drive the share price which are deemed as garbage. Very few people even claim a buy it means nothing as they are traded anyway..all of a sudden a few have returned to ramp the share. Let us all hope we are near to inflection based news and successful funding that will take us from the considerable clinical development that was essential before we venture back into trials, that is why i have decided to take my holdings past the 100k threshold and in doing so have slashed my average to a level where i am confident with the right news we can reasonably achieve. There have been some extraordinary rises across the AIM market this year. Although i am a "one trick pony" i do trade, i enjoy it. Hopefully this request to reply to you is the last i have to do. Rather than looking for points to argue, you might just consider some of my points, as IMVHO you and Inanaco are killing that BB, we deserve better, at least Scancell as a share richly deserves.
27/11/2017
17:42
inanaco: Yes just pointing out that twitter is way overvalued, If the current statements from RNS from the likes of Keith Flaherty etc have had little impact via RNS , i cannot see how Luke The man with twitter could influence. Its my opinion and till we see the share price react to any event on twitter, its all hypothetical. Gooosed blind post, how childish !! in reply indeed Lukes tweet to RG .. generated what exactly to the share price ??? and indeed, did his followers suddenly start buying Scancell ? The point i am making the share price has never reacted to twitter. It reacts to RNS and direct publishing to investors via the Times etc.
23/11/2017
16:00
inanaco: ""if you make a statement that i cannot reason against then your statement becomes the lead policy which i then support "" yes because most of the intense discussion are on the science that impact IP value """There are plenty. Here's just one: share price down from 60p to 12p. Isn't that a negative? I make it negative 48p."""" That's sentiment has the science stood still in all that time, ? ""the Shareprice is not relevant as all i am trying to show is it's cheap relative to the IP.<<br /> Two fatal flaws in one sentence: 1) How on earth can you say the share price isn't relevant??!! It is very relevant if you have invested and need to sell.""" You have now added a third party ie somebody that needs to sell, that is not my position. """It is relevant to how easy it is for SCLP to raise new funds and at what price those funds are raised and therefore relevant to the amount of dilution of our investment.""" Very true, But like you have done, you can then look at the shares in issue and assess the likely outcome of capital growth based on the resultant influx of cash and how the science develops from that Dilution so has a result on both sides of the equation Ie A bigger increase in capital growth than was forecast without that expenditure. """ all i am trying to show is it's cheap relative to the IP.<<br /> Well you haven't! """ I have but maybe you have not understood the years of comparing and understanding of the science of others with wildforce allowed us to pretty well place Scancell into the market place and place reasoned value to the IP """" lozan/Tosh, Mr W cannot explain why the IP has a lower value to the share price <<br /> The IP has a lower value to the SP? Are you saying the IP is not worth 12p? """ actually the buying of the share by Loz at 47p and selling at 53p would indicate Loz buying at the level was cheap and selling at 53p produced a true value event. to then argue its only worth 12p with that evidence would be difficult ... but Loz would have to show comparative value to the IP .. being 12p .. which i suspect would be impossible """not a point worth discussing as No conclusion will be ever drawn from it as its not linked to IP only market sentiment on any particular day ...<<br /> You have a point, why worry about a share price of 12.3 when it could easily be 12.5 tomorrow."" I am not worried about the share price, i already feel the value way exceeds this level, and indeed the Board of Scancell accept that, hence they want to raise the big amounts not based on share price but IP .. however they will always have the fall back position of market priced cash raising which again is Not Ip priced cash raising like a deal """thus all the posts can be dismissed as not relevant, <<br /> In YOUR opinion, which here does not command a very high level of respect"""" then show me posts that you feel are of High Value that i have missed, like i said I debate for my own investment position ..I defend Scancell because I am invested not because your invested,
22/11/2017
09:01
tosh123: Ineptico, you're an OAF . Who the hell are you to give advise on investments ??? Your " all eggs in one basket strategy " is absolutely flawed and contradicts every experts opinion. You're out of the money, big time, you're a loser , simple as that .... As for NIPT, of course it was a risk, but it was also somewhat binary, if they won the case, then the share price would have trebled at least, if it lost ( as indeed it did ) then the share price was going to get hurt in the short term..its not rocket science, however, the fundamentals of the company remain robust, and it provides a crucial service in a growing area. Also, because my cash at risk was calculated on worst case scenario, and my exposure is limited, i can afford to ride out this storm.. Unlike SCLP, NIPT is making money right now, and its anticipated to turn a profit in 2018. Also, being part of a balanced portfolio, what i lose on NIPT, is more than made up for by the likes of SOLG - ARS - IMM - VOD - BP - BOOM and many more. Your posting history speaks for itself... 100% WRONG on every count... I suggest that people read back through your years of uninformed, uneducated rubbish, you could not have been more wrong if you had tried, and you still have the audacity to try and give investment advice...hahahaha. Classic.
Scancell Hldgs share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
Your Recent History
LSE
GKP
Gulf Keyst..
LSE
QPP
Quindell
FTSE
UKX
FTSE 100
LSE
IOF
Iofina
FX
GBPUSD
UK Sterlin..
Stocks you've viewed will appear in this box, letting you easily return to quotes you've seen previously.

Register now to create your own custom streaming stock watchlist.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P:42 V: D:20180122 10:33:21