Scancell Share Discussion Threads

[the real lozan] 22/5/2019 11:04

Just as a matter of interest -
Do *WE ALL* Completely rule-out the chance that 'trials might NOT get underway in H1 2019' ???

[tosh123] 22/5/2019 10:44

Gazza,
its just the ramblings of over exposed idiots who cant see further than the end of their noses. All of them are so far underwater that they feel the need to delude themselves.
As for that moron ineptico, he may not have been the only one, but he was very instrumental in posting the " its in the bag " comment, and was resolute that we would win....the guy is an uneducated idiot, who lies and cheats.

Theres a very simple rule of thumb when dealing with ineptico, just do the complete opposite of what he says.

[ivyspivey] 22/5/2019 10:32

Hi Boom,
Thanks for link.
Good that they see it as a good share to provide liquidity for financing ongoing expenditure.
As long as they do not liquidate at very low prices which seems unlikely given his much their selling would depress the price even more lol

[gazza] 22/5/2019 10:09

Old, I noticed the new poster as well. If he continues in that vein he will fit in well.

[gazza] 22/5/2019 10:08

Tosh, if they didn't want it, why add it to the £10 million already in the bank and claim it would fund all trials for the next 2/3 years. Inan wasn't the only culprit btw!

[panama7] 22/5/2019 09:54

Bermuda, if I am reading that correctly they have Invested extra in Scancell in the hope to pay bills in the future, well let's hope that they don't become distressed sellers like CF and can sell shares at a significant profit.

[panama7] 22/5/2019 09:50

Miavoce, you are correct it was not Scancell's fault that CF sold but it is very much the BOD's gross underperformance that meant when they were a distressed seller they had to sell at these prices and sell at the lowest point in the Company's history.

[the real lozan] 22/5/2019 09:47

mia -
C F is not the first, nor will it be the last...to GO UNDER due to 'misplaced self-belief'.
The POINT IS - that SCLP ...HAS NOT PERFORMED
NB - I say = "HAS NOT PERFORMED"...not "WILL NOT PERFORM"
In BALANCE to those who CLAIM without doubt/ NO RISK, that..."WILL PERFORM"

[miavoce] 22/5/2019 09:23

Hi the real loan

it was this part of your post in which implied that SCLP was a significant factor in CF's demise (despite that fact that SCLP represented less than 1% of the fund if I recall correctly).

"WISER folks might 'reason',that HAD SCLP 'performed'... City Financial would not have been 'dragged DOWN' by 21 million shares in an UNDERperforming 'investment'.
HAD C F not been 'burdened' by such a sustained LOSS, things may not have ended as they did."

[bermudashorts] 22/5/2019 09:12

Some interesting comments from Oxford Technology re. Scancell in their Annual Report which was released today:-

'Last year, I advised that we had made a new investment in April 2018 of £150k into Scancell Holdings Plc (“Scancell”). The prime driver of this was to provide a holding that should provide liquidity in the future, given the illiquid nature of the Company’s other investments, the inability to hold very much cash given the need to be 80% invested in qualifying holdings, and yet also the necessity to be able to continue to have enough cash to pay operating costs as they become due – potentially over a number of years into the future. Obviously, it was also hoped to prove a profitable investment in its own right. Scancell is a company well known to the Board and investment adviser, and operates in the exciting – if difficult – area of cancer immunotherapy. Importantly it is listed on AIM, and the opportunity arose to participate in the £8.7m (gross) placing last year at 12p.

Scancell is using the proceeds to support clinical trials for SCIB1, SCIB2 and Modi-1 and pre-clinical work for Modi-2. Unfortunately, the share price of Scancell has performed badly subsequently, dropping to 7p by 28 February 2019, and falling further since, and is currently just above 4p. Scancell has had some mixed news flow during the course of the reporting period. Approval of the SCIB1 phase 2 melanoma combination trial in the US was delayed due to FDA questions over the mark 2 third party delivery device, but at the end of April 2019 the company announced that this phase 2 trial had received regulatory approval in the UK.

The partnerships with the likes of Cancer Research UK (CRUK) and BioNTech continue. Scancell were shortlisted, but not a winner of the CRUK Grand Challenge: however, the relationships with larger players who supported Lindy Durrant’s technical leadership will hopefully bear fruit in the future. The first clinical trial of Moditope will start in 2020, addressing 3 different types of cancer. The management team has been strengthened with 2 new senior appointments. In May 2019, Scancell announced encouraging progress in the Cancer Research UK SCIB2 pre-clinical studies enabling liposomal nanoparticles to be used as a delivery system as an alternative to the SCIB1 electroporation method. CRUK is now planning a clinical trial to test efficacy and safety of SCIB-2.

[oldnotwise] 22/5/2019 09:10

I see we have a new poster on the other BB who is starting out as another cheerleader.....
It seems that someone's starting to resurrect the "likely" inability of Big Pharma to prevent themselves to form a queue to buy SCLP out....
Looks a bit fanciful to me, given the history of earlier posts in the same vein, but as always over the last seven years,fingers crossed.
The good bit is that at least one poster over there is piling fuel on the rhetoric....LOL
And I'd started to believe the BOD where we need Data Data Data.
Seems the BOD's wrong again.... :-)
AIMO
ATB

[miavoce] 22/5/2019 08:45

Hi the real LozanDid you look at the make up of the CF fund on which they held their Scancell shares ? The SCLP holding was a small fraction of the fund and the performance of SCLP alone did not cause CF's problems. Just wanted to point this out in case you also wanted to blame SCLP BoD for CF's demise :-)

[tosh123] 22/5/2019 08:24

Berm,
thats exactly what happened. All this " we didnt want to win " rubbish is laughable.

Who in their right mind wouldn't want free research funding from CR UK ? to suggest anything different is just nonsense.

Some posters are so desperate to paint every cloud with a silver lining, that they lose any grasp on reality.
We did very well to make the final group of the GC, that is an achievement in itself and we should take some comfort from that fact, but to suggest that we " had it in the bag " was a yet another ineptico fairy tale, and when that failed to materialise, the happy clappers needed to justify the failure somehow, so now state that we didnt want it anyway ! Its like a load of spoilt brats.... Its truly pathetic.

[the real lozan] 21/5/2019 19:46

No Gash -
This is the 5p...Part of the 'cunning plan' designed to stop anyone investing / making a deal...thus 'protecting the existing I P'

[gazza] 21/5/2019 18:14

Is the 5p we are celebrating attaining the same 5p we could never drop to?

[bermudashorts] 21/5/2019 17:35

From memory, didn't CH also downplay the GC during a presentation shortly before the Trinity Delta comments? Seems to me that they probably had a strong inkling that they wouldn't be winners and were trying to manage expectations.

[tosh123] 21/5/2019 15:44

ONW,
of course they would have withdrawn, if nothing else, the other interested parties would have pressurised them to officially withdraw.
Its utter nonsense to suggest that they didn't want to win. This is just another desperate attempt to try and justify what happened.

Nice rise today though all the same.

[the real lozan] 21/5/2019 13:40

O N W ...Good afternoon -
It is maybe worth while, if *WE ALL* remind ourselves, that 'The JOY' expressed, in NOT attaining - eminates from the same 'source' of those who deem it a 'great cause for CELEBRATION' in 'attaining' an S P of 5p.

[oldnotwise] 21/5/2019 13:00

Tosh and Loz...
Take your points in the idea that Scancell "didn't want to win" the GC (sems odd that the received opinion over there before the announcement that they HADN'T won it was that this was such an accolade, £20M to cover anything the company could think of and that it would put Scancell on track and that it would be the share price trigger for riches .... and so on and so on..
Well, if the latest "explanation" is correct at least someone on LSE is prepared to say that the happy clappers have completely screwed up in saying that the GC money was "in the bag" or whatever the mantra was then, because the company didn't want it! ;-)
Fancy selling your BB allies down the river by suggesting that they were all wrong!!!!!
That obviously requires the leap of faith from the reader that the Company didn't want to win it...
OK then, if that's the case why on earth didn't Scancell WITHDRAW from its nomination rather than wait for CRUK to announce it hadn't "Won" the grant.
So the LSE BB now obviously agrees that the BOD ARE incompetent if the latest idea that Scancell didn't want to win the GC is correct....
No, on balance, I think that idea is completely ridiculous (unless the author wants to highlight the BOD as being at best a bit daft or at worst completely incompetent)...
it actually reminds me of the idea that Scancell have done well to AVOID any deals... Remember that one? LOL
AIMO
ATB

[the real lozan] 21/5/2019 12:36

Tosh et al -
"its that we didnt want to win it."
Is this a 'dry-run'...in case the 'trumpeted' trials DON'T start by end H1 {June} ???
The M F - Ministry of FAILURE - are probably already 'cooking-up' the trHYPE, in case of FAILURE, with a 'menu' of =
"its that we didnt want trials to start just now"
"Best to wait until Brexit is sorted"
"A great opportunity to BUY,BUY,BUY"
Or even- a nannygoat-quote akin to "we don't NEED trials...the science is already PROVEN"
.
BUT, *WE ALL* know = any such 'delay' is 'unthinkable'....Isn't it ???