Scancell Share Discussion Threads

[inanaco] 26/3/2019 16:26

so you are now basing the entire portfolio within scancell only on SCIB1 gazza ?

SCIB1 is the backstop ...

it's not the end stop

[gazza] 26/3/2019 16:21

Bermuda,

Yes I understand all about NPV.

I am trying to understand what my Scancell investment will be worth in 2025 assuming successful SCIB1 trials and launch. I make it 69p , not as much as I hoped when I first dipped my toe in here but a decent return. Possibly not enough to justify the risk but I'm here now.

[inanaco] 26/3/2019 16:17

all i had to do was move the 20% success rate UPWARDS

[inanaco] 26/3/2019 16:16

On a serious note ...

That is exactly why i posted this

inanaco26 Mar '19 - 15:17 - 21196 of 21206 Edit
0 0 0
bermuda the reason why i only looked at SCIB1 .. is because it alone covers the Share Price

Using a success
probability of 20%, the rNPV of this programme is £18.5m, equivalent to 4.8p a
share.

In finance, rNPV ("risk-adjusted net present value") or eNPV ("expected NPV") is a method to value risky future cash flows.

which is why i was proving the science data with all comparables

[bermudashorts] 26/3/2019 16:13

..........lol if it were 100% then I think Scancell might have had an offer or two from big pharma by now.

On a serious note, I understand that you're trying to reach a value assuming all trials are successful and SCIB1 is approved as a combination therapy by the FDA and EMA. We're back to the question of what stage you're trying to reach a valuation for - the Trinity Delta valuation is a value now, for the products as they stand, hence discounts.

[gazza] 26/3/2019 16:10

Inan,
>the "model" used excludes efficacy yet. its efficacy that dictates the value<<br />
No it doesn't exclude it. The efficacy will influence the market share which IS included in the model.

What you can't get your head around is the fact that revenue is driven by the need for treatment and products that meet those needs. The market potential doesn't increase just because the science is "clever". People will buy them because they work, no more than that.

[inanaco] 26/3/2019 16:09

I hope we are discussing the same thing bermuda ???

""" trinity model generated a sales figure"""

so i have no idea what this industry average stuff is about ? it not relevant

.. Trinity Data does not have the efficacy data to do that

which is why Novartis drug values Highly because of the "CR" rate

v PD-1 which has a far lower "CR" rate costing a 1/4 of the price

[gazza] 26/3/2019 16:05

Bermuda,
I know it's true that only a small percentage of drugs make it. What I'm saying is it is not a good way of forecasting value of a small bio with a few products. If you had a portfolio of 50 companies with 10 pipeline drugs each it may give you an indication of value. With Scancell and two drugs possibly making it to market in the next 5 years, it will be 0% or 100%. I am valuing the case that it is 100% that's all.

[bermudashorts] 26/3/2019 16:00

It doesn't exclude efficacy. The objective of each and every stage of clinical development is basically to establish whether the drug is safe and effective enough to warrant further development - ie. is it good enough to take to the next level of clinical trials. Only drugs that pass this test will progress from phase I to IIa and from IIa to phase II. It's a standard measurement based on industry experience of drugs that were safe and effective enough to progress beyond phase IIa - ie. they had shown efficacy. You'll notice the probability of success for SCIB2 and Modi1 is lower to reflect the earlier stage of development.

[inanaco] 26/3/2019 15:51

Gazza

I don't agree with the model for the simple reason the model excludes efficacy

same as bermuda's post ..

the issue you have the vaccine is not the active part.. its natures T Cell that is the active part, now you cannot say natures T cells cannot clear cancer .. they can proven by using PD-1

unless you can get your head around that .. then you will never accept the way i have presented the data

the "model" used excludes efficacy yet. its efficacy that dictates the value

[inanaco] 26/3/2019 15:26

you see the question lindy cannot answer is

will it work in humans .. scib1/keytruda synergy .. answer will be unproven until proven

but if you asked Lindy can you see any mechanism of failure in keytruda not locking on to a SCIB1 programed TCR CD8 T cell ..

then the reply would be No, i cannot see a mechanism of failure because that would be the failure of keytruda and as we know that is an approved MAB with history

[inanaco] 26/3/2019 15:19

so just take that bit

probability of 20%

which trial has failed

scib1

or

keytruda

[inanaco] 26/3/2019 15:17

bermuda the reason why i only looked at SCIB1 .. is because it alone covers the Share Price

Using a success
probability of 20%, the rNPV of this programme is £18.5m, equivalent to 4.8p a
share.

In finance, rNPV ("risk-adjusted net present value") or eNPV ("expected NPV") is a method to value risky future cash flows.

which is why i was proving the science data with all comparables

[gazza] 26/3/2019 15:16

Bermuda,

Thanks. A percentage of a percentage is still a percentage! I'll go with Trinity'2 2.3%

So 2.3% market, 17.5% royalty, 60% GP, PE of 20, 100% dilution = 69p per share.

If we get there by 2025 it will still be a lot better than 5% a year!

[inanaco] 26/3/2019 15:14

on the science yes .. but the rest ?

what is the point of the trinity report if Scancell wrote it ?

[inanaco] 26/3/2019 15:07

Bermuda ..

Its says "we" have modelled not Scancell and Trinity have modelled


Looking at the ImmunoBody programmes, SCIB1 is most advanced with the Phase
I/II study in metastatic melanoma expected to start in H119. Assuming smooth
progress, this could be commercially available by 2024 and we have modelled
based on peak sales of £250m and a royalty rate of 17.5%. Using a success
probability of 20%, the rNPV of this programme is £18.5m, equivalent to 4.8p a
share.

[gazza] 26/3/2019 14:59

We shouldn't get too hung up on PE. When a company is not earning much, but is expected to, a PE of 100 is not uncommon. But this is just a ratio of earnings. As soon as the earnings materialise, the PE will suddenly drop significantly. So you estimate high earnings/low PE or low earnings/high PE. I have tried to value Scancell based on a steady revenue stream and low growth. The market average for companies in this position is 15-20. I am prepared to go with 20.

[bermudashorts] 26/3/2019 14:56

Gazza,

1) SCIB1 is restricted to HLA-A2 positive patients which represent about 45% of the total population.

2) I assume that your figure of $14 billion covers the whole market for all stages of melanoma, from neo-adjuvant, adjuvant through to late stage treatments. SCIB1 will be restricted to inoperable late stage III/IV melanoma where PD-1 is the first line treatment rather that a targeted therapy. So your market penetration won't be a percentage of the $14 billion but a percentage of the market which falls under SCIB1's labelling.

3) Trinity Delta have come up with projected sales after talking with Scancell and they obviously have access to far more market data than us. They state that their figures are cautious but I think they're the best you're going to get at this point in time.

[gazza] 26/3/2019 14:53

Bermuda,

I calculated it from the trinity forecast as a % of $14B.

I just wondered why they think the market share is so low. Is SCIB1 only suitable for a small % of melanoma patients?

[inanaco] 26/3/2019 14:39

Novartis last week clinched an agreement with England’s state-funded health service to make the cancer therapy available to children in the first arrangement of its kind in Europe. Young patients could begin receiving Kymriah, which has a list price of about 282,000 pounds ($366,000), within weeks, the National Health Service said at the time.

[inanaco] 26/3/2019 14:32

gazza

"" I suggested we meet halfway - 60% ""

i am not buying a used car off you !!!

the point i was making that movement from 20% to 60% is colossal

it moves the share price by a factor of three on your prediction

the fact that you don't understand the basics is why i will not bother with this thread

what is the point ?

but again you are attacking me for your own failure


"""It strikes me as rather strange that someone who has gone into the minutiae of the science to the point of fanaticism in order to "de-risk" hasn't given any thought to what their investment might be worth IF it is successful.""""


yet it's me that is talking about £8 plus a share

and your own calculation .. even based on a PE of 10 agreed with that

once you accepted what Moljen and myself pointed out

but how you get to £8 is just utter garbage

take Modi1 ...

scancell has now admitted it will work in 5 indications

or have you not understood that ???

they may change the final 3 to take forward but that means the other 2 are still on the radar

its your complete lack of detail and understanding .. that is the issue

I just told you trying to calculate end values is extremely difficult even Bermuda agreed with that by not just using the Nice algo.

and i have pointed out that the "CR" rate with Modi1 could be worth Billions a share price even i could not imagine !!

because of Kymriah

which is priced by "CR"

[bermudashorts] 26/3/2019 14:15

Gazza,

Where did you read 2.3% or have you calculated that yourself based on Trinity Delta's predicted sales against your $14 billion market?

[gazza] 26/3/2019 13:51

I note that Trinity Delta are only forecasting a 2.3% market share for SCIB1 (melanoma) by 2024.
Anyone suggest why it is so low? How much of the $14B melanoma market will it actually be appropriate for?