Scancell Share Discussion Threads

[chilltime] 09/12/2024 11:16

I imagine they are in the mix for SC134 too. They have the advantage of knowing Scancell claims are backed up by their own evaluation.

SC134 would be a much bigger up front and deal overall.

But it’s the same for all with just 2 tied up and many can be produced.

MT suggested £500m but in reality just one aspect of a Glymab to market pays that multiple times over. That’s the risk/reward game.

[marcusl2] 09/12/2024 11:07

Yes Genmab possibly wants to grab the platform before further major interest appears.

[chilltime] 09/12/2024 10:00

Glymab Platform

Surely Genmab are now the most likely candidates discussing the best way forward on the Glymab platform (As mentioned in an interview). Genmab have been close to Scancell from the start.

Given the platform can produce more Glymabs for specific targets, and with over $1.2b in milestone potential already chalked up, at some point it seems to make more sense to acquire the platform.

Daft money was paid in the Tigit excitement era. The Scancell way, that few do, is starting to catch attention.

[chilltime] 09/12/2024 09:52

Glycans

Scancell are likely the world lead in the area. Cancer therapies seem to be about identifying targets largely unique to cancer cells.

The annoying part is having the various platforms and an on the face of it, very cheap raise.

The cheap raise was likely down to the lack of PR over the years, concentration on science rather than commercial/public company nouse.

It is however just a 10% dilution and too much PR would have too many retail in with larger private investor damaging share price swings.

The potential is well ahead of the share price.

Scancell is evolving strongly with multiple assets, the majority of AIM companies are in horrible position with little hope.

[marcusl2] 08/12/2024 11:21

CW


Results show 96 percent overall response rate (ORR), 87 percent complete response (CR),
and 80 percent 21-month progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with relapsed or
refractory (R/R) follicular lymphoma (FL) following treatment with epcoritamab plus
lenalidomide + rituximab (R2
)

[chilltime] 08/12/2024 10:09

Torquay

I’m very confident about fund holding posts, we all know Redmile and Vulpes, 2 from the last raise were 1% level, one of which is not obvious about who is behind it, you have to work it out.

Scancell said then new health funds and it’s been said again this time. Time will tell if the new ones from the last raise added this time.

I have yet not seen the typical AIM backers, Miton, Herald, and the usual list of that type in Scancell.

Anywhere but the UK type funds so far it seems.

Certainly not the junk bucket shops that many are getting screwed by over the last year or so.

[sci102] 07/12/2024 22:56

Yet they mentioned the developments and chose to upload a scancell rns from 11 months ago.

[2tyke] 07/12/2024 19:49

Yep...every single mention of this being 'cheap' over the years....from biotech fund reports....from EE...from Marcus....from inane....from MT.....have been proved TOTALLY WRONG.
Even a broken clock is correct twice a day.
All about intellectual honesty....you either have it...or ?

[2tyke] 07/12/2024 19:41

And what good has 'analysis' been ?
The only analysis worth it's salt with stock prices is technical analysis.

[markingtime] 07/12/2024 19:17

Vulpes don't routinely analyse (let alone publish) developments. When I spoke to Diggle at the AGM about the 2023 paper, he referred to it as something "the guys in Singapore had produced"....apparently off their own bat.The latest comments were not an analysis.They should, however, do another one......

[torquayfan] 07/12/2024 14:15

Chill - hot post ! Cheers.

[chilltime] 07/12/2024 08:45

I assume Trinity mean two new healthcare specialist investors, they have put ‘to’

So likely 80-90% at least in the raise have gone to funds.

If those 2 new investors are on top of the last raise 2, then the tally is at least 6 funds now. In maths terms funds now own 5%+ more of the share of the company.

Clearly lined up as part of the process.

Timing poor as the Genmab deal was known to have a likely answer this month but then again we simply don’t know if Scancell knew the likely outcome, yes/no.

Done, dusted, solid base set for partner and licensing discussions

[sci102] 06/12/2024 20:11

Except this time they kept their mouth shut

[dominiccummings] 06/12/2024 18:56

Vulpes put 'their money where their mouth is'. Respect that.

[sci102] 06/12/2024 18:32

Vulpes is not an original source. They analyse developments. Except this time they didn't. Not only that, but what they did upload was verbatim the rns from scancell's interim, not even the latest one.

Fool me once...

[markingtime] 06/12/2024 15:14

What it means is that there is no new info from Vulpes.

[sci102] 06/12/2024 14:32

Fair enough chillclown. Take a look at the latest vulpes report from a few days ago. They briefly talk about new developments while uploading a pdf from last year. I'll let you figure out what that means🤣

[inanaco] 06/12/2024 13:58

Nobody would develop a Tri Mix of Ctl-4,PD-1 and a Plasmid in the same injection completely incompatible

and why would you do it ... ?

ISCIB1 has a new patent

In fact it helps us if the others go off patent, it makes the treatment option open to a wider population based on Price

which means BMS need to buy into the project or risk bio similar control

[chilltime] 06/12/2024 13:44

Well that helps explain the subcutaneous point, prompted by BMS perhaps.

Octopus

Was your Big short post intended because Vulpes are invested.

The point there is Stephen Diggle, made a fortune for his fund betting against the ignorance of the subprime situation that crashed the markets. He is the founder of the Vulpes fund and a very astute guy, he recognises Scancell as one to back expecting big returns.

His backing this is a major reason why I was interested to invest in it, that along with comments about Professor James commissioned by Vulpes, due diligence on various bios under review. Scancell came out as the clear one to invest in due to the science and pre clinical data.


So I prefer to consider what the Diggles and Professor James thinks than random posters. Further backed by Redmile who clearly have the same view.

Plus other new funds as yet not obvious, but the vast majority of that raise will be sat with existing and new funds.

[octopus100] 06/12/2024 12:25

Looks like all funding taken up. For anyone long term - with the Genmab detail announced the SCIB results recently released - great opportunity to add more at lower price but on the basis of more public info.

[sci102] 06/12/2024 12:07

Isn't it funny that several companies are saying the same thing for the same asset. When will you ever learn you are only good for table dancing?

PS for the smarter ones

Non obviousness does not relate to how cumbersome it is to find a formulation that works with a different mode of administration, but genuinly suprising scientific findings. This is 100x more strict when someone tries to extend a patent . Those people are not talking to the patent offices or the science community when they say stuff like that. They are talking to individual investors, that, since the covid period, increased their activity and are therefore significant players in the markets. Sadly if you ask me, but it is what it is.