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.
https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=793171 Honestly, I don't have the time or inclination to read it. Wake me up when it's over.
This showed up in my Schwab newsfeed about an hour ago.
Dow Jones - July 1, 2024 2:35 pm
Vitro Biopharma to Offer 1 Million Shares in Initial Public Offering
The regenerative medicine and cellular therapy company expects to price its offering between $5 a share and $6 a share, according to a securities filing. It expects net proceeds around $4.7 million based on a public offering priced at the midpoint of its guidance. Vitro intends to use the net proceeds to advance the continued development of its AlloRx Stem Cell therapy candidate, among other efforts. Vitro said its common stock has been approved for listing on the New York Stock Exchange American under the ticker VTRO.
Write to Denny Jacob at denny.jacob@wsj.com
Can’t we all get together and file a lawsuit?
OK! Mine, also with Schwab, is showing 0 as well. Derek, you still here?
@pcarew... Thanks for the info. Still at $0 in my Schwab account. There was an SEC filing this week that does suggest to me that something is happening. But I will believe it when I see it.
My vitro Biopharma stock has reappeared in my Fidelity acct with a cost basis of $17ish.
Maybe something is moving
Thanks for the laugh, I needed that! So they are still doing business, selling things and the like? Kinda surprising. Either way, looks like us shareholders are going to continue to be frozen out.
The quarterly report is out. It says the usual pile of nothingness wrapped in the the standard gobbledygook of warrants and convertible this or that. They still claim to be planning to start two clinical trials, but they have been saying this for a number of years now, so it doesn't mean anything. The only "news" of note is the sales of AlloRx for offshore treatments is picking up significantly, as demand for stem cell therapy picks up. If you missed it, an NFL quarterback (Kirk Cousins) was treated recently with AlloRx. So, who knows , maybe that business will grow and keep them afloat. "For whom and for what" is separate question, as the company seems on a 100-year path to nowhere, as though stockholders have the lifespans of biblical patriarchs.
Tom, I know, I think it's been 3.5 years since the delisting. At one point during that time, things seemed to be on the up and up and we even had reason for some optimism. Something must have fallen through. Maybe with a financing arrangement, and/or a trial didn't pan out. Who knows? A real head scratcher. Beside anything else though, I'm just so disappointed that they have never even attempted to communicate with us shareholders. A total disregard.
@grandslam... There's nothing to talk about. Speculating about a company that says nothing to its shareholders and seems to do nothing but execute quarterly financing agreements to stay afloat is exhausting and, ultimately, pointless. I've never seen anything like this. Complete silence from a CEO??? The guy has never said a word, never addressed the shareholders. The clinical trials??? What clinical trials? They never started, as far as anyone knows. What does this company even do? Is it a front for something? Some sort of weird tax write-off? Why are they bothering to pay people? Is there any plan? Any strategy? Nobody knows. And I'm tried of thinking about it. It would be nice to recover my investment someday, but at this point I don't see how that could be possible. As I've said recently, this company should rename itself Seinfeld, Inc. -- because, as far as anyone can tell, it's about nothing. It's certainly not about shareholder value, which remains at... let me check... right... zero.
Hello? Anyone there - there - there - there? I wonder if this might be the final post on this board lol.
Aaaannnd... It's May. The crickets are getting very monotonous.
NASDAQ would be nice, but how about just going back to being a penny stock? An uplisting can come later, on the heels of news.
It seems like Furman's vision was to spin off the offshore stuff to Zamora and kill the nutraceutical boondoggle, focusing on becoming a legit biotech with real clinical trials (of course, we'll never know, since Furman might as well be a projection on a wall). Unfortunately, it appears that all he has done is create an unsustainable burn rate that funds accountants, with zero progress toward the only thing that matters in this strategy -- namely, doing the clinical trials. They seem to have no interest at all in explaining to shareholders what the hold-up on those is. Nor will they admit that they literally have zero chance of a valuation that would support a listing on a major exchange until they at least start them, rendering moot all the talk about creative ways to kickstart a NASDAQ listing. It's like 2+2 is supposed to equal 5 or something, and the world is supposed to accept that. None of this makes any sense. They've had a candidate cell therapy ready for testing for something like five years. It just doesn't add up.
I've certainly curbed my enthusiasm. I wonder if they are even operating anymore. They did supposedly get $3M but did that ever materialize? Something tells me they're not a going concern anymore.
Aaaannnnd... February is now April. Crickets. They should rename this company "Seinfeld Biopharma" -- a company about nothing.
Just an utter disregard for us shareholders. Gotta say, it was a fun company to own back in the day. Remember when they announced a breakthrough in treating Covid. The delisting followed soon after.
Yes... LOL. A couple months ago it seemed evident that former insiders & investors were exerting some pressure to resume trading. But nothing ever seems to happen, other than occasional SEC filings that state some objective -- which then falls into the black hole that is their communications. Continued deafening silence from the CEO, and no updates on the only thing that really matters, which is if and when the clinical trials will ever start. So who knows. Are they just going to burn through another $3 million in darkness and silence, announcing nothing and filing required SEC documents? March will turn into April, which will become May and then June. And we'll be sitting in front of our computers asking the same questions. I suppose if those insiders and investors decide to blow it all up with lawyers, that could make a difference (though it would be the end of the road for most of us). It's not clear that the company has any intention to do anything real, unless forced to do so. They might not like to read that, but what do they expect when they don't communicate, outside of required boilerplate filings?
A minute change with my Schwab view. Instead of seeing "N/A" in one or more columns, I'm now seeing $0.00. Now that's progress lol
Yeah, it is crazy. You know, sometimes you just have to believe your lyin' eyes. When they announced the IPO at $17 million, I set up a spreadsheet with different scenarios, and tried mightily to figure out how they could make it work, considering listing requirements of a major exchange and the equity positions of Musick and Zamora. Ultimately, I just didn't see how the major investors needed for an IPO could stomach it, unless those two somehow sold into the IPO to reduce their control (which ultimately would have severely diluted legacy investors like us). But that was never going to happen. I think it might have worked if it was just Musick owing a plurality, as he is a scientist and this is his life's work. But the Zamora thing was clearly too much for rational investors to bear. I have no idea how the company allowed that to happen. All we really know is that the Furman regime took action, and subsequently stripped Zamora of direct control over his shares. I suspect they realized that they were never going to be taken seriously if they didn't do something. It's still not ideal. But anyway, yeah, one would hope the $3 million is enough for them to generate some results and establish some credibility.
Crazy shit but what else is new? Thanks for your take, as always. A good thing is that the $3M they (apparently) got fairly recently has been keeping this a going concern, with the trials etc. they've detailed in the 10-K proceeding apace. At least by all appearances, that is.
@grandslam... It can be very confusing, and I don't have the time to detangle it all. It is important to distinguish "what we care about" -- by which I mean "total number of existing shares + total number of potential shares via options, notes and warrants" -- from the share counts discussed early in the latest filing. The latter is dealing specifically with shares that will be eligible for public trading if/when they go live on the NASDAQ. I'm not particularly concerned with that. Roughly speaking, I think what they are getting at is that most/all of the Musick and Zamora shares are not part of this, but a number of shares are being created via options, notes and warrants.
But, again, I'm not really concerned about, say, the daughter of a former CFO suddenly being able to trade 3,000 shares. I'm concerned about the total share count today and the total share count that will exist if all those options and warrants become shares. The share count is 4,430,535. As best I can tell without going crazy there are 1,681,077 additional shares that could be created. That number could be (probably is) wrong in certain respects, but I think it's a decent general gauge, insofar as 1.1 million of the 1.6 million are just stock options.
Bottom line: I think there are roughly 6,000,000 shares (4.4 million + 1.6 million) either in existence now or that will likely exist if the company survives. Of these, roughly 2 million will be tradeable on the NASDAQ, if and when the listing ever happens. Which reflects the fact that Musick and Zamore own two thirds of the company (which I think, more than anything, is why the IPO likely failed).
So with the new ticker, there will be fewer shares. So there must be a formula somewhere for converting VODG shares to VTRO? I take it then that that would be the share count that's already showing on Schwab for CUSIP 928501402. How did they arrive at that share count? OK I'll have to go back and see how many I used to own.
@grandslam... If I'm reading it correctly, there will be roughly another million shares added to the total from exercise of warrants, or shares issuable under prior agreements. Of the 2,179,344 shares in the filing, 1,224,183 shares already exist, leaving 955,161 in the "to be created" category. But it is very difficult to figure all that out in a 10 minute read, particularly in light of information later in the document where they delineate all of the various outstanding warrants and their respective exercise prices. I don't have the time -- or, frankly, the interest or expertise -- to figure all that out. All that really matters is that a return to trading is looking very likely in the next few months, if the NASDAQ approves their plan and a market develops. As I've said, I think the fate of the share price will then depend heavily on their moving forward with the clinical trials this year, as advertised. If bona fide trials are underway, there should be enough speculative interest to maintain a market for the shares for a while.
With 4,430,535 shares outstanding, $15 per would make it a $66M company. Ambitious indeed. Just start trading already and let the market determine what's worth what.
They files another S-1 with the SEC that seems to formalize their previously announced plans to enter the NASDAQ without an IPO, with pricing determined by the market -- all seemingly in response to a demand for liquidity by various influential shareholders. The only real "news" here, based a quick skim, is they are setting the baseline share price at $15, until trading commences and the market speaks. At $15/share, most investors from the penny stock days would likely see a gain of 200% - 500%, depending on when you bought. Which would be nice, if it held up. But I don't expect that to hold up initially, as I don't know where the demand will be coming from, given their apparent determination to remain utterly unknown in the marketplace. But you never know. They keep doubling down on the clinical trials starting this year. Should positive early results, or rumors of same, emerge, that could provide a tailwind later this year. But I will believe all of this when I see it.
Sure, let it be a penny stock. We can always uplist later if things start to go well. Right now I'd be thrilled to see it priced at anything, a fraction of a penny or whatever. The PRs can always start then, at which point anyone can buy or sell as they wish. Ah those were the days!
@grandslam... It's discussed in some detail under "Risks Related to Ownership of our Common Stock", and also in a prior 8K. The more I think about it, the more I think it's a bad idea to relist on a major exchange, until and unless they generate some buzz with the clinical trials. If there is no demand for the stock, the price will plummet, even with the tiny float. There must be buyers. And if the price plummets, another delisting will occur, helping no one. If they are only doing this to appease shareholders who want some liquidity, but refuse to do the things necessary to create awareness of their business, it seems to me that a lower key listing on an OTC board would be more appropriate.
Tom, thanks. I attempted to go through the 10K.... lots about the business, which is good, but don't see anything about getting relisted. What section are you looking at?
The 10K (Annual Report) is out. If nothing else, they are at least filing robust reports nowadays. No, we never get to talk to the CEO to ask questions, but at least the info exists. My takeaway from skimming it is that they are serious about re-entering the equity markets, they are ready to initiate the first two clinical trials, and they plan to build a second manufacturing facility. I don't think they have the funding to do that last one this year. It seems to me that they probably have the cash to do the clinical trials or the new facility, but not both. But who knows.
So, yeah, I think this is finally the year that the logjam breaks, on multiple fronts. That doesn't mean the results will be good. It could be the year that the equity officially becomes worthless. Or, who knows, the shares could be trading at $30 this fall with some favorable buzz. But I do think we'll finally be out of the black hole we entered in 2020.
@grandslam... it's in the SEC filing.
Haha I just hope I'm sitting down if and when something like that actually happens. For sure, a new CFO can only be good news. What makes you think that he'd be highly incentivized? I mean, you'd think that would go with the territory, that that would be a CFO's primary goal here, that he'd be real motivated to have this thing succeed, but are you basing this on anything more than that?
They replaced the CFO. Haas remains as a consultant for a time. Since we only have conjecture to lean on with these folks, one can only surmise that the failed IPO was the end of the road, and/or the recent agreement with large shareholders to obtain a NASDAQ listing through the back door involved a lot of inside pressure to try someone new. The new CFO is highly incentivized to get this done, although that can only go so far. One does wonder how they expect a market to suddenly emerge for the securities when they have done exactly zero public communications over the past couple years to generate awareness. I guess we'll see if the new CFO understands this basic fact of life, and maybe suggests to the CEO that maybe, who knows, it might be a good idea to actually, you know, say or do something in public. Stranger things have happened. There's a first time for everything.
Would it really kill this company to release a bleeping press release that outlines their plans for the funding they just acquired? Really. Just a one-page, simple little statement that says this or that clinical trial will begin on this or that date, and the schedule for others has been adjusted as follows. Is it really that hard? (Hint: It's not -- I've written plenty of them). I do not understand the silence. I really don't. They're acting like they want to be a private company, and yet they're spending money on things that only public companies need to do. This is perplexing. They seem to want to be invisible, while expecting the market to value them on ...what exactly?
They filed another 8-K today with the SEC, to document what appears to be the remaining $1,000,000 of the $3,000,000 they authorized last fall. Again, my assumption is this funding is in lieu of the failed IPO to (a) pay the bills for a year or two, and, presumably (b) to start one of the clinical trials. If all of that is true, I would expect them to announce the initiation of one of the trials with some public fanfare in Q1, while simultaneously trying to enter the NASDAQ through the back door, as previously discussed. I assume the theory is that the juice of initiating a clinical trial will provide the momentum to price the shares adequately. But who really knows. Until the apparently deaf and mute CEO addresses the shareholders, it is all conjecture.
Tom, you should send your 12-27 post to anyone you know at the Company. Excellent insight!
Tom, thanks for your insights, as always. Their opaqueness, especially now, is puzzling for sure, but hopefully things will start to happen now that we're in the new year? I hedge any real optimism, of course, seeing that this shitshow has been going on for so long.
@grandslam... It is promising to an extent. I think they have made a lot of good and correct moves over the past couple years, with one exception. The good news is the new people have put the company on the road to legitimacy, taking what Dr. Musick and his tiny staff did, in terms of developing a product and manufacturing technology, along with an offshore clinical treatment protocol, and turning it into a real company that is doing what is necessary with the SEC and establishing real inroads with the FDA. That's all great stuff. Where they have fallen down (IMO) is in their complete disregard for publicizing what they have done and are doing. Basically, no one is telling the story. Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one coming close -- on an obscure investment board that nobody reads.
I had a lot of hope when they made Zamora the CEO -- a young doctor with a potentially appealing media presence who could tell the story. But he didn't. Aside from one or two limited interviews, he did nothing. As far as anyone can tell, he's in it for him and his dermatology practice. The documentation they released to the SEC after removing him suggests that he milked things to his own benefit and did very little.The new CEO and CFO clearly understand the mechanics of public companies, which is good. But, again, they have done nothing to promote the company or just make it something worth investigating to potential investors. I know a good number of people who are serious investors, and none of them have ever heard of VB. That's on VB. It's like they are trying to remain under the radar -- and I could understand that in the days of mostly operating in offshore facilities trying to build a portfolio of safety and efficacy data. But they're past that now.
People don't throw money at unknown entities. If VB wants to be seen as $50-$250 million biotech startup, it needs to start telling the story. If they don't have anyone to tell the story, they should pay someone to do it. ThinkEquity certainly didn't. It sounds like they have hired another consultant. I'd love to talk to that person/company, and see what they have in mind. Because nobody associated with this company seems to understand that you'll never be taken seriously as an investment vehicle without some level of public awareness. The latest CEO has literally never even addressed the shareholders, let alone done any significant media. I don't know what they're thinking. Any attempt to re-enter the serious equity markets without someone or something blazing the awareness trail is going to fail. And I hope that the people who run the company understand this.
Tom, sounds promising. Should be interesting to see how this prices out.... if it ever does, that is. At this point, seems it would be a major accomplishment just to get relisted at *any* price, let alone to qualify for NASDAQ. We can only hope!
I read a little more of the most recent filing. It seems pretty obvious that some sort of deal was struck by some existing shareholders that would provide them liquidity, and this is somehow related to whomever just gave them $2 million. The latest S-1 specifically states "We are registering the shares of common stock in order to permit the selling stockholders to offer the shares for resale from time to time." The "selling stockholders" are listed by name, and include the former CFO John Evans. One would presume that a number of influential shareholders are tired of their shares being untradeable. Well, join the club, fellas... But who really knows. We'll just have to see how this plays out.
And so it is (i.e., symbol removed from Schwab listing). Hadn't noticed, or considered that the VTRO symbol was tied up with the IPO filing, which was tied to the AMEX. With that now officially dead, yes, they will need to refile the VTRO symbol with the NASDAQ. But I suspect we won't see it reappear in the Schwab listing until and unless the shares start trading. The only question now is what the market thinks the shares are worth. If it's north of $10/share (and a $40-50 million market cap), then we will be on the NASDAQ. If it's less than that, then we will have to see if they are willing to re-enter the OTC markets. The problem with that for them is that it will be harder to raise capital. We'll just have to see if demand materializes for the shares. And on that note, it sure as heck would help if they would start publicizing the technology, and if their CEO would come out of hiding. It's hard to generate interest in something that the public has never heard of.
I’d take $10. I see Schwab is no longer showing VTRO but rather the CUSIP. I see this as a good sign, that something’s in the works.
As an aside, given the small number of shares post-split, the initial SP would almost certainly need to be north of $10/share. I can't see how they would meet the NASDAQ standard for market capitalization otherwise, if there is no demand for the shares at that price level. Whether they would consider an OTC listing if it fails is anyone's guess. I can't see why not, with the IPO off the table and some working capital in hand. The main downside to a listing is it will kill legacy investors if they have to raise money again and the public share price plummets. But hopefully it doesn't come to that. Conversely, if it does meet the NASDAQ threshold, most legacy investors will be in the black by a considerable margin, and those seeking to exit intact will have a window to do that. Not my strategy personally, but I'm sure there are a lot of folks out there that just want out.
Wow they actually said the L word, legacy. Sounds promising indeed. Yes, you'd think they'd want to do a little PR to drum up interest. Fingers crossed!
Following up briefly to earlier post, I read a little more, but not everything. They are effectively allowing the market to determine the price of the shares. On the day that trading starts, there will need to be sufficient pre-market buy/sell orders to create a functional market for the securities, as determined by an independent financial advisor. If/when the market for VTRO meets those standards, VTRO will become active on the NASDAQ. There is no date in the filing, but I have to believe that we will be seeing actual news from the Company very soon regarding these plans -- it makes no sense to do this and keep it a secret. But, bottom line, the liquidity and price of our shares (the filing specifically mentions "legacy" shares -- a term that I have not seen to date other than in my comments) will be determined by the market. So we can all stop conjecturing about schemes and shenanigans and such things. There will be public demand for the shares or there won't. And if there's not, then there is nothing that anyone can do.
There is a significant S-1 filing with the SEC today. I have not read or digested it. It appears to makes shares tradable on the NASDAQ, without an IPO. I will need to read it later. Best guess (only a guess) is this is perhaps part of some deal to acquire the $3 million previously announced. I don't know what the implications are for legacy shareholders, good or bad. I'm just posting this in case anyone wants to go check it out before I do. Short story seems to be that the shares will be listed on the NASDAQ without an IPO/underwriter process, meaning that the shares will be priced by the market before the commencement of trading. I have no experience with this, but it sounds like there will be extreme volatility at first, and extreme caution is advised. On the bright side, it does sound like the shares will be trading again soon.
But if they do want to bypass us, why not just keep on ignoring us? It's worked like a charm for the last two or three years (I've lost count LOL), so why not just keep on doing it? Then one day you find, ten years have gone behind you.... and, yes, you've missed the starting gun.
Having said that, I just don't get it. What better way to do raises than to simply issue more shares? That way it doesn't have to come out of anyone's pocket.... except, of course, us shareholders.
@grandslam... The symbol doesn't mean anything. You can't just ignore valid shareholders in the underlying entity. You can dilute them into virtual irrelevance (and it is a miracle that hasn't happened here, given how long VB has been around -- which I think speaks to Dr. Musick's commitment to shareholders, and keeping expenses under control). But you can't ignore them. You'd get sued immediately, and probably also face criminal securities fraud charges. All that aside, I think it would be a mistake to confuse their highly unfortunate lack of communication over the past few years with any kind of desire to harm those shareholders. I don't think they have any desire to harm their shareholders. Being in the minority, we just don't matter all that much. They've done what is required to legally bind our ownership interest during the transition. At this point, it would be really nice if they would release a shareholder letter to simply explain the strategy going forward, but they are not required to do that. I assume that they don't want to be held to any promises, such as the ones that Dr. Musick made in his final shareholder letter before stepping down as CEO (he said that they would pursue a listing on a higher-end OTC board after getting straight with the SEC). Otherwise, we have shareholder rights, and they are respecting them for the most part. But we have very little power, and they are taking advantage of that too.To pcarew's suggestion of bankruptcy, that would be a last resort, if (and only if) they were actually bankrupt. But it would be like dropping a hydrogen bomb on attacking forces on your own soil -- sure, you eliminate the threat, but you also destroy yourself in the process. But, again, there's no point in doing any of that. Legacy shares probably comprise something like 10-20% of the share count at this point (I haven't looked at it recently). We're not worth the steep cost of eliminating. We don't have to worry about such things. What we need is for the Company's core product (AlloRx) to get some attention and prove itself in clinical trials. If and when that happens, a lot of money will be chasing a very small share count, the Company will have a market cap in the hundreds of millions, and we should all make 10X or more on our investments. But it's a huge "if". If those trials never start, or peter out, it's game over for everyone.
A much easier path would be just to declare Chapter7, shares become null and void, reorganize under new name.
The downside is the reputational hit.
But couldn't they try to get around having to buy back our shares? They have a new symbol. Couldn't they attempt to start from scratch and leave all of us pesky shareholders in the rear view mirror? Risking litigation needless to say, but maybe they'd bank on us not pursuing it. After all, it has been years now that we've been frozen out, and we've done nothing.
Followers
|
60
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
2872
|
Created
|
12/12/06
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators |
JAMES R. MUSICK
Chairman, President & CEO
Vitro Diagnostics, Inc.4621 Technology DriveGolden, CO 80403
(303) 999-2130
(303) 762-1240 – FAX
www.vitrobiopharma.com
SIC Number: 2836
Fiscal Year End: 10-31
Transfer Agent: Securities Transfer Corporation
2591 Dallas Pkwy Ste 102
Frisco, TX 75034
469-633-0101
CIK: 793171
Outstanding Shares: 17,214,000 Public Float: 11.577M
Authorized: 55M
All Share data is up to date Taken from the 10K & 10Q 2008:
In the last 12 years the OS has only been raised 8M shares
The company has been fully reporting since 1996
There has never been a Reverse Split
Nevada Secretary of State:
Copy link into your browser for Authorized Share Info
https://esos.state.nv.us/SOSServices/AnonymousAccess/CorpSearch/CorpDetails.aspx?lx8nvq=je%252b030vYJV4m6q8vvRTC9Q%253d%253d
DISCLAIMER: Nothing in the contents transmitted on this board should be construed as an investment advisory, nor should it be used to make investment decisions. There is no express or implied solicitation to buy or sell securities. The author(s) most likely will have positions in the stock, and may/will trade a portion or all of the position in the stock mentioned. Readers are advised to conduct their own due diligence prior to considering buying or selling any stock. All information should be considered for information purposes only. No stock exchange has approved or disapproved of the information
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=squote&symbol=VODG
Patent Info:
Vitro's cell immortalization patent allowed.
http://www.vitrodiag.com/6_12_02.html
Press Release: Vitro granted additional fertility drug patents.
http://www.vitrodiag.com/7_23_02.html
PAT. NO. 6,414,123
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPT
PAT. NO 5,990,288
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPT....
Vitro Awarded Cell Immortalization Patent By United States Patent Office
http://www.vitrodiag.com/10_01_02.html
PAT. NO 6,458,593
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPT....
Recent patent Application that the company expects to gain a Notice of Allowance with an issued patent to follow
http://www.vitrodiag.com/US20060093586_1.pdf
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
June 23,2008 Wall Street Transcript interview...
http://www.twst.com/ceos.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
2007 Interview with The Wall Street Transcript
http://www.vitrodiag.com/TWST_Interview.pdf
Business Summary:
Vitro Diagnostics, Inc. dba, Vitro BioPharma (OTC Bulletin Board; VODG) is a publicly traded biotechnology firm committed to “Harnessing the Power of Cells”. The Company has generated over 30 adult human stem cell lines that drive numerous commercial opportunities in medical research and treatment of disease. Our business plan focuses on initiatives to: 1) commercialize products for use in drug development & discovery, 2) develop and commercialize products to treat animal diabetes and 3) develop and commercialize a stem cell-based treatment of human diabetes. Our advanced stem cell technology has broad application to several high-value medical products. We intend to leverage our platform technology to build a Company based on high-margin products targeting a variety of diverse markets in medical research and treatment of previously untreatable or under-treated diseases.
Executive Summary:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=23705800
Informative Links regarding Pancreatic Islet Therapy:
http://www.fda.gov/cber/genetherapy/pancislet.htm
Shortage of Islets: major obstacle to widespread use of islet transplantation is the shortage of islets.
http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/dm/pubs/pancreaticislet/
Nearly 600 diabetes patients worldwide have now received islet transplants, and enough patients have been transplanted that long-term benefits can be documented.
http://www.jdrf.org/index.cfm?page_id=106304
Cell Therapies For Diabetes, Cancer May Be Coming Soon
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/101239.php
Pancreatic Stem Cell Transplantation
http://www.minervamedica.it/pdf/R41Y2004/R41Y2004N01A0025.pdf
Researchers are a step closer to a cure for type 1 diabetes after the successful transplantation of insulin-producing cells into eight patients.
Cell transplant dramatically changes diabetic's life
Published: Wednesday, 19-Mar-2008
http://www.news-medical.net/?id=36476
Six centres are receiving nearly £10m of government funding ( London) to offer transplants of insulin-producing cells.
http://www.worldhealth.net/p/cure-hope-over-diabetes-therapy.html
Transplants of own stem cells may let diabetics forgo insulin
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/health/bal-te.diabetes11apr11,0,7517225.story?coll=bal-health-headlines
In Vivo Imaging of Immune Rejection in Transplanted Pancreatic Islets
http://diabetes.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/55/9/2419
SEC EDGAR Filings: Fully reporting for 12 years OS grew by only 8m shares since that time
http://knobias.10kwizard.com/files.php
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |