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.
Found this on a Chinese website. Is it old news? Something about a clinical trial for Lipigesic M that will include children and teenagers.
http://www.hkpharmtech.com/show.asp?id=474
I believe they are both subsidiaries of Intellicell or Regen. They share the same address in NY.
I was curious about the post referring to mjna and followed up with the company. They reiterated basically what was written. Pretty exciting if they decide to venture into this market. Of course, they have to make the decision to venture into the market. Could be big if they do.
They also mentioned a sublingual delivery system like that of Lipigesic.
This is just my own dd. You should perform your own before you decide to buy or sell. I'm pretty excited about the company, though.
I was curious about your post and followed up with the company. They reiterated basically what you wrote. Pretty exciting if they decide to venture into this market. Of course, they have to make the decision to venture into the market. Could be big if they do.
They also mentioned a sublingual delivery system like that of Lipigesic.
This is just my own dd. You should perform your own before you decide to buy or sell. I'm pretty excited about the company, though.
If you believe it's that simple, by all means, buy away!
$2500 in trades? $2500 in funding?
I don't think cryptic posts are going to re-ignite this stock...
Both good questions. Wish I had an answer...
I realize that SDVI is basically a write-off and there's not much hope of anything else, but it's interesting to see that games are getting out internationally and not doing bad in rankings...
http://www.distimo.com/leaderboards/apple-app-store-for-ipad/thailand/games-racing/paid
I'm not responding for Cazual, but how are you so blind to the fact that there are multiple sides to every story, especially in business?
Quite some time ago I read the exact same things being represented again over the last week. Went through case filings as well. As I said, multiple sides to every story.
All my opinion.
Might want to look up the definition of libel before you agree with someone screaming "fraud."
Just my opinion...
It's very strange. Nordic License Toys appears to have the same games that Graffiti has published except they say published by Nordic License Toys. Games4Kids appears to be the website selling the games. Some of this is difficult to make out due to the language barrier.
This is all just my opinion. These things may not have anything to do with each other.
Not sure what's going on. If Mart sold the rights to the games that were once Graffiti or if he sold the company or licensed the use of the games, but there's a company called Nordic License Toys i Lidingo AB that appears to have the same lineup as Graffiti. Of course I can't read the language these are posted in, but the art looks pretty darn similar...Check it out:
http://developer.mobile.brothersoft.com/nordic_license_toys_i_lidingo_ab-2649848/
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/billi-banni-vorschule/id661616836?mt=8
They've also come out with new Reader Rabbit games:
https://itunes.apple.com/za/app/reader-rabbit-smart-jump/id690159408?mt=8
Thank you! Glad to know I wasn't the only one thinking it!
I've dealt with migraines since I was 11. Imitrex doesn't work. Treximet does work, but it makes you feel like you're body is going to explode and it also costs a fortune. I have to take 8 ibuprofen to have any impact at all (yes, 8).
Haven't had a migraine in awhile. Since I bought this stock, it's been the only time in my life I hoped to get a migraine so I could try out their product. Got one last night. Tried the product. It worked for me! It didn't stop the migraine dead in its tracks (no prescription I've ever taken has), but it performed just as good, if not better, than any prescription I've ever taken! And it didn't make me feel like sh!t.
Incredibly happy to be holding this stock.
Really? Check your facts. They announced in 2012 that Cell-Innovations signed a license agreement with Intellicell for use of Intellicell's process.
Here is the link:
http://www.genengnews.com/gen-news-highlights/intellicell-licenses-svf-manufacturing-technology-to-cell-innovations/81246199/
Australian clinic using licensed SVFC method:
http://www.cell-innovations.com.au/about-us
I'm not sure how accurate or up to date this is, or if it has anything to do with the Pioneer Fund posting, but according to TD Ameritrade, there is or was an institution that owns/owned 3.79% of the stock when shares outstanding were around 316m.
http://research.tdameritrade.com/grid/public/stocks/fundamentals/fundamentals.asp?symbol=SVFC
If there are institutional investors in SVFC now, you can count on the big league...
Just my opinion.
Had thought maybe Intellicell might own this center (given the name and use of Intellicell process), but it looks like this center has been around awhile. Licensing the SVFC process maybe? Potential partner? Acquisition?
Awesome!
So, I was just thinking about the court's ruling regarding the FDA and what is classified as a drug and what is a medical procedure.
Without devolving into puns and jokes, I started thinking about artificial insemination. The process for deriving sperm for artificial insemination is markedly like the SVFC process for stem cells. Rather than attempting to describe the process, I have posted a description of the process below. Artificial insemination is considered a medical procedure. Note the similarities of the process to the SVFC process and the dissimilarities of artificial insemination process to the process described in yesterday's court case. To sum it up: a substance is removed, undergoes a minimally altering process and then re-injected (or injected) into a patient. I don't think the end substance of the artificial insemination process is considered a drug by the FDA and in my opinion, the cells from the SVFC process shouldn't be considered a drug.
Here's the process:
If you are undergoing IUI the sperm sample will undergo a special washing and processing procedure. After a semen sample is obtained, the sperm are washed and concentrated down to maximize the chances of conception. During this washing and processing phase, potentially toxic chemicals are removed, along with a seminal plasma shell that surrounds each sperm cell.
The process of sperm washing offers several benefits:
The sperm are concentrated to boost your chances of getting pregnant.
It may prevent you from having a possible allergic response to the sperm.
It may help to minimize any uterine cramping.
Sometimes the FDA seems more obstructionist than regulatory...it's not surprising that treatments in the US take years longer to be approved than any other country in the world...thank goodness SVFC has a backup plan just in case...Europe, Korea and Thailand!
Looks to me like the filing officially stating that Hanover no longer owns any SVFC stock. Their share dump is complete.
That would seem to make sense. It would also seem to make sense that they could license the process. A fully documented process with oversight should be able to be licensed.
I see this as a tactical, competitive approach on the part of SVFC. This creates a market in which you have a superior product (SVFC cells) that aren't associated with a single provider (one medical facility only that carries SVFC cells). This puts the importance on the cells themselves, not the facility that injects them into patients.
A not-so eloquent analogy would be if Coca Cola were only available at Coca Cola stores. It wouldn't be quite so popular...
I believe there have been references to SVFC opening additional facilities. I think they are just talking about the labs to conduct the SVFC process. If the Dr. is talking about opening additional Regen locations, he may be attempting to co-locate both the lab and his medical practice in multiple locations. I'm not sure. Maybe he's going for a grand structure of being the supplier and medical facility? I hope he's looking at licensing. The more medical facilities using SVFC cells, the better. In my opinion.
Of course, this is all conjecture.
Supervision of the processing of the cells. From what I've read, SVFC is not going to suck out or re-inject the cells. That is up to whatever medical practice is making claims and selling treatments related to VFCs. I think the company is being very specific on this issue for a reason. SVFC is simply supplying a better quality VFC. It makes no claim as to the efficacy of the treatments in which the VFCs are used.
Notice that claims of efficacy have come from Regen. Yes, SVFC has cited the claims, but the claims have come from Regen.
Just my opinion.
I believe Regen currently treats patients with the cells derived from the SVFC process, which is why the FDA allows the SVFC process to be used and why SVFC cannot make any claims.
The wording is very specific when you look at the description of the process. A doctor at a medical facility will carry out the entire process related to medical practice during a patient's visit. SVFC will have a lab set up in the medical facility that will take in the cells extracted from the patient, process them and send them back to the attending physician for re-injection. The only part SVFC plays is processing the cells.
At least, this is my understanding and interpretation of the description.
This is also the basis for the patents. The process for processing the cells and their use.
Here are the two areas of concern regarding the FDA's definition of "drug" and stem cells. In my opinion, from what I have read of the SVFC process, it meets both conditions and should not be considered a drug. It sounds like it is minimally manipulated (nothing is added), it is intended for homologous use, it probably does cause a systemic effect but is only for autologous use and it is carried out in the same procedure. Again, just my opinion and I'm not a doctor, scientist, judge or FDA employee...
TITLE 21--FOOD AND DRUGS
CHAPTER I--FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
SUBCHAPTER L--REGULATIONS UNDER CERTAIN OTHER ACTS ADMINISTERED BY THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
PART 1271 -- HUMAN CELLS, TISSUES, AND CELLULAR AND TISSUE-BASED PRODUCTS
Subpart A--General Provisions
Sec. 1271.10 Are my HCT/P's regulated solely under section 361 of the PHS Act and the regulations in this part, and if so what must I do?
(a) An HCT/P is regulated solely under section 361 of the PHS Act and the regulations in this part if it meets all of the following criteria:
(1)The HCT/P is minimally manipulated;
(2) The HCT/P is intended for homologous use only, as reflected by the labeling, advertising, or other indications of the manufacturer's objective intent;
(3) The manufacture of the HCT/P does not involve the combination of the cells or tissues with another article, except for water, crystalloids, or a sterilizing, preserving, or storage agent, provided that the addition of water, crystalloids, or the sterilizing, preserving, or storage agent does not raise new clinical safety concerns with respect to the HCT/P; and
(4) Either:
(i) The HCT/P does not have a systemic effect and is not dependent upon the metabolic activity of living cells for its primary function; or
(ii) The HCT/P has a systemic effect or is dependent upon the metabolic activity of living cells for its primary function, and:
(a ) Is for autologous use;
(b ) Is for allogeneic use in a first-degree or second-degree blood relative; or
(c ) Is for reproductive use.
(b) If you are a domestic or foreign establishment that manufactures an HCT/P described in paragraph (a) of this section:
(1) You must register with FDA;
(2) You must submit to FDA a list of each HCT/P manufactured; and
(3) You must comply with the other requirements contained in this part.
[66 FR 5466, Jan. 19, 2001, as amended at 69 FR 68681, Nov. 24, 2004]
TITLE 21--FOOD AND DRUGS
CHAPTER I--FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
SUBCHAPTER L--REGULATIONS UNDER CERTAIN OTHER ACTS ADMINISTERED BY THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
PART 1271 -- HUMAN CELLS, TISSUES, AND CELLULAR AND TISSUE-BASED PRODUCTS
Subpart A--General Provisions
Sec. 1271.10 Are my HCT/P's regulated solely under section 361 of the PHS Act and the regulations in this part, and if so what must I do?
(a) An HCT/P is regulated solely under section 361 of the PHS Act and the regulations in this part if it meets all of the following criteria:
(1) The HCT/P is minimally manipulated;
(2) The HCT/P is intended for homologous use only, as reflected by the labeling, advertising, or other indications of the manufacturer's objective intent;
(3) The manufacture of the HCT/P does not involve the combination of the cells or tissues with another article, except for water, crystalloids, or a sterilizing, preserving, or storage agent, provided that the addition of water, crystalloids, or the sterilizing, preserving, or storage agent does not raise new clinical safety concerns with respect to the HCT/P; and
(4) Either:
(i) The HCT/P does not have a systemic effect and is not dependent upon the metabolic activity of living cells for its primary function; or
(ii) The HCT/P has a systemic effect or is dependent upon the metabolic activity of living cells for its primary function, and:
(a ) Is for autologous use;
(b ) Is for allogeneic use in a first-degree or second-degree blood relative; or
(c ) Is for reproductive use.
(b) If you are a domestic or foreign establishment that manufactures an HCT/P described in paragraph (a) of this section:
(1) You must register with FDA;
(2) You must submit to FDA a list of each HCT/P manufactured; and
(3) You must comply with the other requirements contained in this part.
[66 FR 5466, Jan. 19, 2001, as amended at 69 FR 68681, Nov. 24, 2004]
An 8-k was filed today, but it only details the press release from the other day. I don't think it is THE 8-k everyone is waiting for...
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1125280/000101376214000096/form8k.htm
Please provide proof of your claim. A quick Google search turns up nothing on the CEO.
Exactly what I was thinking. IR did some serious damage to SVFC with the foreclosure announcement...
I'd like to see that lawsuit.
Right, but why not lock up 100% of the voting rights?
In my opinion, there's some person(s), group or entity, yet to be announced, that will get the remainder of the voting rights. Of course, just a hunch and probably wishful thinking...
I find it interesting that the Series F Preferred stocks that were issued only represent 50.95% of the voting rights...Now the current Intellicell board holds the majority of voting rights, but why not issue the remaining shares? They could have issued shares equal to 100% of the voting rights and given one person a deciding vote share. They didn't, however. 49.05% of voting rights through Series F Preferred stock remain to be allocated, from what I can tell (or I missed something)...
I just find it interesting.
"National Phase?" What exactly does that mean? There doesn't appear to be anything on the US Patent site that mentions anything about a "National Phase."
Intellicell holds an issued patent: US 8,440,440 B2. That "B2" designation indicates a patent previously published. You can look up brief summaries of patent phases here: http://www.patentlens.net/daisy/patentlens/3037.html
You can also view the Intellicell patent here: http://pdfpiw.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=08440440&homeurl=http%3A%2F%2Fpatft.uspto.gov%2Fnetacgi%2Fnph-Parser%3FSect1%3DPTO2%2526Sect2%3DHITOFF%2526u%3D%25252Fnetahtml%25252FPTO%25252Fsearch-adv.htm%2526r%3D3%2526p%3D1%2526f%3DG%2526l%3D50%2526d%3DPTXT%2526S1%3Dintellicell%2526OS%3Dintellicell%2526RS%3Dintellicell&PageNum=&Rtype=&SectionNum=&idkey=NONE&Input=View+first+page
What are you attempting to imply about the US Patent?
While I don't hold much hope for the future of SDVI, it is interesting to see that Graffiti Entertainment iOS apps are still selling. They were even updated in August. Even had a sale from October 1st to November 1st (I think that's what one of the posts says). Just interesting, nothing more.
Take a look:
http://www.appannie.com/apps/ios/publisher/graffiti-entertainment/
http://www.appholic.cc/developer/graffiti-entertainment
Took me awhile to look at it.
All of this is just my opinion based on what the internet has produced.
I believe the reference to Eilon could be a reference to Eilon Natan a vice president at MD Global Partners, the investment bank/financial advisory firm retained by Intellicell in October.
Here is Eilon's Linkedin profile:
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/eilon-natan/27/342/207
Here is the link to the announcement about MD Global:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/intellicell-biosciences-engages-md-global-185521047.html
I'm hopeful it means they've worked out some kind of beneficial deal. Could be wishful thinking. Could be awesome.
All conjecture and my opinion.
Hyperbole? Please provide an example where any of my opinion was exaggerated...
The filing states that rent has been paid OR accrued. Like most filings, this is open to interpretation. I would venture to say (in my opinion) that some rent has been paid and some accrued. In other words, some rent owed to the CEO for use of the space has been accrued since Intellicell has not had the cash to pay for it. This amount would represent, in essence, a loan to the company from the CEO. Will he benefit from this down the road if the company is successful? Absolutely. Why shouldn't he? I believe we've already seen a portion of the company's accrued rent paid back to the CEO by way of use of the product, licensing, etc. Intellicell, at the moment, doesn't have cash to pay rent so it's taken out in trade. Again, fairly standard. I'm assuming there aren't many landlords in NY who would be willing to accept use of Vascular Fraction Cells in exchange for rent...
The set up is also beneficial to Intellicell for a few reasons:
1. Rent can be paid to the CEO through trade (use of cells, licensing, etc). How else is Intellicell going to pay rent right now?
2. Being co-located with Regen allows for demonstrative use of Intellicell's process. You have noticed that Cha has both their lab and medical application center located in the same place, yes?
3. Since the assets of the office are not owned by Intellicell, they cannot be foreclosed upon (ding ding ding).
4. As a startup, it would have been highly unlikely the company could have secured a reputable office location without revenue or assets. Regen provided the credit history.
Again, I will point out that in your own post you've stated that everything is there in the filings, in black and white. For everyone to see and come to their own conclusions. The company is not attempting to hide this arrangement.
Just my un-exaggerated opinion.
From a cost, liability and tax perspective, pretty normal practice for a startup.
It also represents the CEO's investment in the company. Instead of Intellicell having to raise cash to sign a new lease with an outside landlord, the CEO has had the company rent space from him with a very long grace period for the first month's rent, allowing Intellicell to have a home office for a period of time without physically paying rent. This is pretty much a loan to the company from the CEO. Again, pretty standard practice. Start your business in your garage, charge rent later when your business is successful...where have we heard this before?
Also, your post makes an incredibly valid point: it's all there in black and white. For everyone to see. In other words, they aren't hiding this arrangement. It would be fairly easy to structure a much more shady deal where investors couldn't see what was going on...
Just my opinion...
I hope they go the cosmetics route as someone mentioned earlier with the new patent info.
While the curative/healing properties of stem cells undoubtedly has the potential to help many that are suffering from debilitating disease and ailments, from a financial perspective, can you imagine the $$$ associated with, say, a Botox alternative? Stem cells supposedly have this potential. Could Intellicell's approach and new information about extracting cells from nonliving organisms lead us down this path? All rhetorical questions, but I really really hope so!
Someone has caught on already, but maybe Intellicell's process could produce better results?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2200642/Could-stem-cell-cure-wrinkles-end-endless-hunt-perfect-skin-cream.html
Obviously all of this is just conjecture and my opinion, but I'm hopeful.
From Intellicell's website:
Dermal treatment for burns and non-healing wounds
Studies are demonstrating that the superficial injection of autologous vascular fraction cells into the skin is showing a clinically significant number of benefits. Many patients are seeing a reduction in lines and wrinkles as well as overall improvement in the tone, texture, and elasticity of the skin. IntelliCell believes that this therapy will demonstrate anti-aging benefits and will also show efficacy in the treatment of burns and scars. Further studies are being planned for this clinical application.
Something just published on the European patent...
http://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2014015229&recNum=1&office=&queryString=FP%3A%28intellicell%29&prevFilter=&sortOption=Pub+Date+Desc&maxRec=6
Stem cells from dead folks...
Well, the Vicom lawsuit is moving forward. Ken Hurley was served with papers a week ago and ordered to appear in court in December. I'm not sure what this means for the current Signature Devices company. The lawsuit names Signature Devices, but everything appears to be directed at Ken...
http://openaccess1.sanmateocourt.org/openaccess/civil/casereport.asp?casenumber=504852&casetype=CIV&courtcode=A