Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
That's interesting.... I read something about MundiPharma 'not being in it for chump change' repeatedly on this board. Appears they weren't really 'in it' at all. Suing an overseas company for breach of contract would take time and effort - not to mention the funds required, which clearly BIEL doesn't have. If the contract were iron-clad that would certainly help. That said, it could take years to sort it all out. Optimistically, perhaps they could arbitrate a quick settlement for some much needed cash. One can hope anyway.
BIEL stopped being an SEC registered company years ago. It would be nice if BIEL had continued to file quarterly financial reports. They don't have to, and they no longer do so, which earns them a Pink Limited Information sign on the OTC markets. That's it - there is no punishment or legal recourse or anything else. If BIEL decides not to file the next annual report it will earn a STOP sign, which will further dissuade newcomers from investing. We have to wait to see what happens when the annual report is due next year.
There are many OTC pink sheet companies that continue to operate and trade as Pink Limited, and even with STOP signs, though the latter gets very dicey for investors. I cannot think of a single positive reason for stopping quarterly filings. It could be a cost saving issue, but that isn't a positive development. Investors are now in the dark essentially regarding BIEL's performance. The utter silence since the Synergy deal was announced isn't helpful either. The stock is just churning now, waiting for some solid news, positive or negative.
FYI: This is the BIEL board, NOT the BIEI board.
Oh, the irony.......
BIEL would likely have to do something (or not do something) to earn a STOP sign. If the plan is to report annually and not quarterly, then I would not think a STOP sign would be triggered. I believe this can bounce along for awhile without quarterlies, file the next annual report, and keep on trucking. Sure, lots of other things can happen; just doubtful without another trigger event that BIEL's status changes substantially.
Yes, and there is a way to go yet to get to gray sheet status. I don't foresee that, despite the apparent halt in quarterly financial reporting.
The ins and outs of the daily Reg Sho report, and what it portends, has periodically been discussed on this board. It's significance, or more importantly, its lack thereof, is almost universally misunderstood when it comes to OTC penny and sub-penny stock trading.
There are a number of sites, including SEC and FINRA sites, that are most helpful. The following OTC Markets blog is very good:
https://blog.otcmarkets.com/2023/05/08/what-investors-should-know-about-finra-daily-short-sale-volume-data/
It includes the following:
Nearly 100 million shares dumped at .0003. Oof. Looking at .0002's now. Really wasn't expecting that.
Somebody off-loaded 25 million at .0003 this morning. Painful
I periodically go to the BIEL corporate website; took another look today to see if there is anything under 'career opportunities', but it states there are no opportunities at this time. Then again, I don't know how often (if ever) the website is updated, as the last financials reported there are from 2021.
Meanwhile, Kieth Nalepka's LinkedIn profile no longer indicates he is on the BOD of BIEL at the top of his profile as it once did; however, it still indicates he is on the BOD under the 'activity' section. The thing is, if you fail to put an end date on anything showing in the activity section, LinkedIn will consider it current until you apply an end date, if I recall correctly. He may very well still be on the board, but it is very unclear how much work he is doing on behalf of BIEL, if any. He clearly has a new position with another company, which may not take kindly to moonlighting, if that is in fact what is taking place.
Financials would provide some clarity, but no sign of them. I am beginning to think they are not forthcoming, which is surprising since BIEL has been good about providing them previously (even if late periodically).
Doesn't work that way in the OTC with a non-SEC registered company; at least around not filing financials. BIEL has the 'limited info' sign up. Eventually it could become a 'stop sign', but that takes time and continued missed filings. The only consequence for that is it usually scares off prospective investors, and trading skids to a trickle on its own without any formal sanctions.
No matter how bad financials are, better to have them and stay current then leave everyone guessing. The longer they are late, the more speculation ensues. Is it just bad numbers, or something else? Or maybe BIEL just decided to report annually only. Maybe it saves outside accounting fees. We just don't know, and uncertainty isn't a positive.
I wasn't suggesting BIEL do either an R/S or declare bankruptcy; just pointing out that poor cash flow can sink even a profitable company, and profitable companies with negative cash flow have been forced into reorganization to stay in business. Investors wouldn't care for the results of either option at this juncture, but I am not anticipating either to be undertaken.
Again - would be nice to get financials. No quarterly report, and no explanation, does not create positive vibes.
A CPA that goes 'inactive' doesn't really relinquish the CPA designation. An inactive CPA does not have to retake the CPA exam to reactivate the license. I also believe someone can claim having earned the designation even if it is inactive, as long as it's made clear that the status is inactive. Now someone with in inactive status cannot certify financials as a CPA - that has to be done by a CPA with an active designation. That said, BIEL has an external CPA to do that, which is standard practice in most companies regardless of how many active CPAs are on staff in an organization. It's a very common scenario.
All that notwithstanding, it's frustrating to have the financials outstanding at this juncture. BIEL's financials have been traditionally straightforward, and as someone pointed out previously, a good deal of the quarterly report is a cut and paste from the previous quarter. It's sales, profit/loss, and cash flow that are critical and it doesn't (or shouldn't) take much to put that together. We are not talking about a company with multiple subsidiaries or complicated accounting issues, at least historically, and there is nothing to indicate that has changed. It is tempting to conclude BIEL cannot afford to pay and external CPA to sign off, but I cannot imagine things are that bad in terms of cash flow. Then again, it is possible for even a profitable company to require a bankruptcy reorganization due to negative cash flows; though that seems counter-intuitive, it does happen, and BIEL is not a profitable operation.
Getting the fins out - regardless of what they show - would stop speculation and be a positive development. The longer they go unfiled, the more speculation it will drive, and the more negative that speculation will be.
It isn't necessarily that anything in particular happened with regards to Kelly's CPA license being inactive. If a CPA isn't actively a practicing CPA, or actively doing CPA work for a company, they can let their license be parked as inactive. My last firm had a number of executives who started their careers as CPA's within the business but had taken operational leadership roles and were no longer doing accounting related work, so their made their licenses inactive. I believe there are things like continuing education courses required to keep these active, and these individuals didn't have the time or the need to do that. They could always have reactivated them had they so desired. Very common in some industries.
I know of CEO's for companies who were CPAs and had deactivated their licenses. They had entire departments working for them to do that work. In Kelly's case, she isn't working as a CPA, even if she does the 'books' for BIEL, and I believe she gets outside CPAs to prepare the reports. Makes sense in her case.
Q2 financials were due August 15th.
One box is delivered which contains two sealed packages. Package One is the 7 day trial ActiPatch. Package Two is the 720 hour ActiPatch unit.
Recipient can open the 7 day trial ActiPatch and use the product. If results are not satisfactory, unopened Package Two can be returned for a full refund. If Package Two has been opened, no refund can be obtained. Recipient won't be likely to open Package Two unless the trial verson performs satisfactorily.
It makes sense to me considering there are two separate product items being delivered.
The way I take that is: Use the 7 day trial ActiPatch. If that doesn't work for you, return the ActiPatch 720 for a refund, as long as the ActiPatch 720 box has not been opened. Two separate products in two distinct packages, yes? I think that would cover it.
I see 200K shares traded on the uptick.
Thanks - missed the updates. I hate to see what is devolving here; so much mud-slinging. Perhaps the updates will be helpful. Appreciate the info.
/low bars...fat fingers
I guess perhaps paying site members were asked. I think I would have asked assistant mods personally, paying or otherwise, but of course it wasn't my call.
Agree completely regarding your additional comments. I rarely look at other forums for the same reasons you mentioned and share your concerns as to the impact of the changes here.
I do not recall seeing the reasons for the TOS changes; I could have missed them, but to my knowledge or recollection I did not see them. I would happily share them if I did know.
To be fair to iHub, I was asked if I had any opinions on the changes, and I would guess perhaps all assistant mods were asked the same. For all I know, others may have been asked as well. Perhaps I was asked as a paying member. To my deep regret I looked them over briefly and did not offer an opinion, so shame on me. My excuse will have to be that I was just too busy with other affairs (both personal and work related).
I agree with your observations. I suspect that the Admins employed by iHub spent a huge amount of time monitoring boards (especially boards that have no assistant mods), and replying to requests for deletions, or responding to requests for restorations of posts. I often wondered how they kept up with the volume, which, as you correctly observe, will be greatly lessened with the new guidelines. The only two things left that took any time are SPAM posts (very few), and duplicate posts (more than SPAM, but not much more). Even items that still go beyond the mud-slinging bounds now allowed are not to be removed by assistant mods but are to be passed over by them to Admin for a ruling. I would likely not even bother doing that, as it requires guessing what exactly goes beyond the pale.
Perhaps more people will join now; the world is full of people who love pissing contest with personally offensive comments that are now allowed. TBH, though, there are many forums already available for that. I preferred this venue specifically because that was not allowed - and yes, the degradation is already evident. I have seen some hilariously witty personal attacks in my time; but what we will likely see is the usual 'asshole/moron/etc.' stuff. I could get that in a third grade classroom.
I might drop Admin a note at some point, but again I was asked prior to the changes, and I didn't offer anything at the time. I certainly didn't read the 'personal attack' section carefully - I just saw there still was one and moved onto something else.
Best Wishes
Nope - not the case.
What will happen, and is already happening, is that a discussion about the stock, its performance, the company, its leadership, or anything else related to BIEL itself, will be answered more often with vituperative insults and name-calling, instead of an even moderately intelligent conversation about the merits of the points presented. This applies to both positive and negative posts.
I mean, if you are happy with responding 'you're an asshole' instead of arguing the merits or demerits of a post, then fine. Seems to be the overall norm today. Sadly, it contributes nothing to the discussion.
Yep - sums it up perfectly.