I agree and already knew what you posted. There are of course differences between L and Direct as you point out - and it is certainly within the realm of possibility that the differences could actual make for a different result. However, in the bigger picture, they are basically still mostly very similar ideas about exposing the DC at a critical point in their development to the tumor antigens (whether in lysate or by injection in vivo) and the chances are very good that you will in fact get similar results as many people assume quite naturally.
You do not understand the MO of Direct. Besides utilizing previously damaged cells from treatments received I believe Direct causes cancer targets to be exposed by tricking the cancer to let down its guard and keeping activated/stimulated checkpoint blockades on the sidelines until the active immune response begins to subside and immune memory takes over. This is achieved not only by the treatment itself but also by proper spacing of treatments. Direct also shuts down new growth of the tumor which causes it to die from being cut off from access to nutrients and energy ie necrosis. If you understood this you would understand the enormous potential behind Direct and not sitting on the sidelines wondering if this company has any chance to succeed. Best wishes.