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.
What are the links to Kyocera and Zimmer? Like direct links to Zimmer and Ceramtec? Not by proxy through Amedica. Taking into account Ceramtec and Amedica are operating under too similar of trade dress on "material matters" to not be stepping on toes.
I tried to do some leg work on this and got my leg stuck again wondering wtf. So we're changing our name to mcdoanalds(sintx)? When that's a previous trademark of spinal kinetics?
Sintx "where material matters"
http://www.sintexmedical.com.br/home
What evidence do we have on Coorstek? location relationships in Utah? location relationships in Texas with CTL? CTL, if underlying relationships are true being more aligned to Stryker? A underlying surprise strategic alliance between ceramatec and Coorstek? I think that's it. Pretty shaky.
Now I have brought to light an interesting conflict of trade dress between Ceramtec? is this a legal matter? Or more evidence that suggests a Zimmer strategic joint partnership? You sue your competition, not people you are in bed with.
But why print Kyocera right on the label if so? How would Kyocera fit at that point?
Where is Japan clearance?..Well, where is China clearance? A few posts back I posted A .PDF wondering if Boston had seent it. I think I remember seeing there China clearance is "on hold". Like Wego couldn't get this cleared. Hah, it would have to have a secret fatal flaw for no clearance there. Think I remember reading Japan FDA clearance almost demands predicate clearance aka simultaneous clearance. Globalism.
Beyond a full line of bone grafts paired with a full line of fixation devices I'm wondering what is peaking interest.
Is this payback? Ceramatec now owned by coorstek? can I open up a Mcdoanalds? where "we are all loving something?"
I`ll break down the "color pink" lawsuit real quick as it seems relevant. Biolox claims the addition of chrome adds to the strength in all of it's publications of biolox delta. Coorstek releases a pink ceramic that manufacture process does not infringe upon the ceramic formulation or manufacture process of Ceramtec. Biolox attempts to protect the color pink as trade dress in hindsight. They go as far as trying to create a study that the addition of chrome has no effect on strength.
The judge throws out the new study because it wasn't peer reviewed. The judge finds the addition of chrome to add increased strength. The color pink is relevant in design. If it where irrelevant it could be considered part of trade dress.
Now we got this:
https://www.ceramtec.com/_img/content/kompetenz.endoprothetik.animation.tab3.1.jpg
and this:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1269026/000119312514052128/g593074ifc.jpg
eerily similar.
https://usermanual.wiki/Pdf/BioloxShoulderBroch12SEn.1783690561.pdf
Here's some previous evidence of the use of "Material makes the difference" note its not "material matters"
Going through that PDF.
Ok I found one. an example of amedica using material matters:
https://d1io3yog0oux5.cloudfront.net/amedica/files/pages/amedica/db/249/description/Amedica+Corporation+Executive+Summary+-+April+2016.pdf
I don't know if your argument holds weight in trademark court. Can Burger King troll MCD's and release promotional material and say as a matter of conversation whatever it is theyre doing at burger king, well I`m loving it? obviously you're safe Boston.
Sigma Aldrich holds the trademark but is the context of the word matters important? Sigma releases a publication called material matters. The use of the word matters has a different context such as "matters of fact" vs. "this why we think it matters". I don't see Sigma Aldrich caring here. My concern is Biolox trolling Amedica with a trademark cease and desist. No evidence they own it so it's probably not a legitimate concern.
But beyond legally I'd like to know prior art on this to figure out who is mimicking who on this. Who is possibly paying attention to who? Is prior art even relevant? Or is it an attempt to weaken a claim of "materials mattering"
Perhaps this seems irrelevant and I should check myself to avoid a thought train to schizophrenia, but this is the reality of corporate trademark trolling in the court room. It's hard to deem something a state of mental illness when it's collective like this.
Wait, Can I say material matters™? can I say I'm loving it™? Where is the line drawn on trademarks?
https://www.ceramtec.com/_img/content/kompetenz.endoprothetik.animation.tab3.1.jpg
https://amedicablog.wordpress.com/2017/09/18/why-material-matters/
Anyone not seeing how C+CSC wasn't proof of concept? Probably lays the ground work for predicates for FDA clearances. What is brazing? what if you wanted a hip stem that was Titanium Sini coated and transferred into porous silicon nitride in the middle? Without brazing I assume you would create the implant out of titanium and coat the porous titanium to achieve this effect.
All assumptions.
https://reconstructivereview.org/ojs/index.php/rr/article/view/159/203
Here's some proofs metals can fracture, btw.
CeraRoot
https://www.ceraroot.com/patients/zirconia-vs-titanium/
A dental screw made entirely of oxide ceramic. Titanium in its metal state can fracture. Seen a failure in a hip stem from fracture of the titanium causing the hip stem to crack into two pieces. Knowing this can we really say titanium has less potential to fracture then a ceramic screw? Seems like a logical fallacy. We hear "metal" and expect it to bend or at least not fracture. Fun fact Calcium is a metal. The calcium in our bones is the oxidized version.
So you can. Not saying it will outperform in load bearing of teeth without fracture but I wouldn't make any conclusion on performance without testing, watching titanium fracture.
http://img.medicalexpo.com/pdf/repository_me/74636/trabecular-metaltm-dental-implant-brochure-134866_1b.jpg
Zimmers trabecular metal. I think this one had some recalls, but I like the porous design. It has potential for jaw bone incorporation in my opinion. With the proper materials I'd hope to see enough incorporation into the organism to mitigate loosening and receding bone.
As far as dilution. I`m not sure if there is or isn't conversion going on on the latest deal until I see the quarterly. I`ve watched traders jump in and out with 10k shares for 5 minutes on penny tickers skimming 20 bucks thinking they're killing it. You give me enough of these guys and I`ll show you a 13 million volume day without an ounce of dilution. I can't use volume as an indicator for dilution staring at this. Once they where issued as preferred that's good enough for dilution in my mind whether common or not. You own a preferred share of the pie, no clue at that point why a conversion to common effects this increase of the available AMDA pie beyond it now has a vector for trading.
http://www.peri-implantitis.info/images/peri-implantitis_fig3.jpg
Why dont they add this pic to their website like "we at dentist X pride ourselves in perfect smiles. Why dont you nock out all your teeth right now for no reason besides they dont look pretty enough"
Again. Only warranty on their work is until they get their truck out of your driveway. Aboslutely no evidence for bone integration here.
What causes bone loss in the jaw?
https://www.mpo-mag.com/contents/view_online-exclusives/2013-08-30/new-bioactive-glass-implant-strong-enough-for-load-bearing-fractures/
https://ceramics.org/ceramic-tech-today/biomaterials/glass-scaffolds-help-heal-bone
Rahaman studies extensively in silicon nitride and sandia kicked him down a robocaster. His partner in 13-93 is Sonny. A load bearing replacement for bioglass 45S5.
I dont know what the problem is. Why can you not replace the Silicon Dioxide scaffold with silicon nitride. I bet it would load bear all over the place. You know what, forget it just use whatever formulation that's in Cascade. It will probably fuse in a matter of time I`m willing to work with without sitting around for high school science fairs about HA tricalcium phosphate doping for the next 15 years.
That's a spinal cage design in that 2017 report I linked and referenced that I haven't heard any mention of. Looks familiar. Would really like to get a closer look at the design and stack it up against this one:
https://www.stryker.com/us/en/about/news/2018/stryker_s-spine-division-receives-fda-clearance-for-3d-printed-t.html
Not that it seems design IP is readily protected in the spinal cage market.
Theres evidence that Chon is an elite Cyber hacker that digs deep on your Indeed pages. You want some rando dentist who barely knows how to use a computer to know about your white dental screws you post a big picture on your website. A big picture on twitter. Even if you just say "yea, we're going to make this. We have one." This is why it's Chon making cold calls.
boston, anybody see this before?:
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4110015-amedica-amda-presents-ladenburg-thalmann-2017-healthcare-conference-slideshow
Some things make me believe we haven't seen this. page 21.
Not sure. I`m no expert, nor do I know anyone using products so I can only speak anecdotally. I know I was reading something about manufacture and they where talking about crushing us seashells. I know I was reading something years back of people implanting coral plugs on their skull and it fusing into horns. I know I've read within the cadaver products own literature it's a vector for disease.
Even 30 million issued common would bring a total valuation of the company at around 15 million at .48. Ha, that's a joke. 10 million for the CTL deal Not even mad,bro. That's something I`m willing to look passed for the long term health and growth of the company considering AMDA could not secure wide scale adoption due to lack of adeptness and confines in sales.
That's a company so sure of itself it can take the hit with so much to offer. I`m willing to agree. If you really love something you let it go and float around like a butterfly instead of trapping it in your basement and spraying it with a water hose.
Why am I so hostile toward the idea that there's a floor below .48? Probably bias. That would require me absent mindedly scanning over(a distinct possibility) a loop hole, and misguided thought process of positions at .48 right here right now being a good idea. If no such loop hole exists, right here right now any position taking under .48 is gutting retail like a fish.
It also requires AMDA to advertise a .48 floor all over the paperwork then have a secret trap door against their advertised .48 floor. I don't think so. I want to believe in fair AMDA with integrity. A fair deal is if I ran a deal a year ago for a 1.24 floor conversion, any future deal I sign will allow you to convert at the new deal conversion price. So you`re not stuck converting your deal at 1.24 while my new friend converts his deal at .48. That seems fair.
The same way if a new deal materialized with a .24 floor the .48 floor guys would get the new deal floor.
Why not convert to common at .48 at .20 cent common stock price? If the intent is to buy up and immediately sell off to retail it's a losing trade.
If the intent is to take a position. I have shares at .48 and am fine with this. It's a buy at .48 and if its a buy there its a buy at .20 weighing current book values and forward looking statements. Sonny probably is just better at gauging the underlying value of common than retail is, depending on where these shares even came from at .20. Either way thanks for the cheapies guys. I'd like to suspect I know where my new shares came from, rather than being "that guy" that just gutted some poor long here.
https://www.phillymag.com/articles/2009/08/26/beating-the-odds/
Awful strange joke to make on the caddy hole in one bet using the money to buy a new hip. The context is the link to susquehanna and that sec filing of Amedica holdings. A high speed options trader.
https://lifelongjoints.eu/publications/
Who are these guys and what are they doing in my house touching everything?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28167873
Who ever they are, evidently, I`m in their house touching things. Looks like theyve been keyed into the metallosis topic since at least the beginning of 2017 if anyone had bothered to look.
So the 15 million offering closes in May and these N-Q's where filed in August and are unrelated? Just 3 institutions taking a small position in common?
That's the thing. I dont see any common listed in Ishares N-Q for instance. Am I doing it wrong?
Ok wrong Maxim. Some kind of circuit products. Completely unrelated to Maxim group so its not that.
Need to double and triple check to make sure I`m doing this right using F3 to find, but I believe doing this to the N-Q filings all 3 list dentsply. I find this interesting but not concrete on this being the underlying security holder of the preferred. Check the dates at some point upon filing this doesn't indicate conversion to me.
Conversion below .48 would require either more shares be given or Amedica handing money back in the form of this dividend from whatever they acquired in the $15 million deal. What you are suggesting would cut that in half. The quarterly mentioning $2k worth of these dividends is hardly proof of something written out nowhere, related to this round of funding. especially when there where previous rounds of funding that contained these dividends that may have a few shots left of conversion. Granted I`m not poking too deep into this angle to find out for myself.
Fintel is reporting 3 N-Q's suggesting to me there are three organizations holding an underlying security that holds these preferred from this round of funding listed in their N-Q filing. It's only a matter of digging to find out who.
If there was previously purchased preferred with the intention of using it to convert to common to cover this would explain the price action. If .48 is a good price and a buy to Sonny then why not take whats left of retails at .24 which is a better buy. either is an equally valid reason for price action in my opinion. But what do I know?
can you post a link to a source? I'd like to know more about this dividend and how it works to pull the floor below .48
To be fair and full disclosure, what I've posted about the potential for federal contracts is a level of highly speculative as can be obtained. I`ll break it back down.
Vanderbilt is referred to as the Yale of the south. Vanderbilt University Medical hospital looks like a place to get life flighted in when a smaller less qualified hospital doesn't cut it. The medical professors work in line with the Giant VA across the street. The First C+CSC went in in this geographical region. It was not reported on what hospital. The Dr. that put it in had some kind of professor role or lesser within the University at least at one time. That VA runs an Ortho dept.
Pretty speculative and loose.
Now CTL has reported contracts to distribute their spinal equipment through a company that receives gov. contracts to the VA. from a cursory glance CTL and Amedica meet a bunch of the requirements for consideration for gov. contracts such as manufacturing within the US.
Ceramatec was working closely hand in hand with the DOE at one point before being absorbed by Coorstek. The way they absorbed was a bit off for my taste. They where working on R&D, then "couldn't grow into manufacturing" and there are loose postings on coorstek where the parent company all along. In my opinion, they probably had no intention of developing manufacturing and where specifically working on R&D.
The VA should be interested in this. Unlike normal hospitals that operate for profit. The VA operates with a mission statement under the federal government. Their sole goal is the health and welfare of the patient. No sketchy business that is laced through out the normal medical implant sales commercial market such as financial kickbacks from device companies.
The armed forces break you. Humping gear across uneven terrain. Speeding in uneven terrain in vehicles etc. Does a number on these guys hips backs and knees. The contract is They will break you then do their best to fix you at the VA. This is a "sports medicine" like environment and after you receive an implant, I expect a higher level of wear than in a civilian.
The effects of metallosis. This is a spectrum that limits key abilities that are needed for the armed forces to achieve optimal performance such as cognition, hearing, eyesight and motor function. This could have an effect on the battle field looking at the macrocosm.
The level of PTSD within veterans. metallosis has effects on mood and motor function and generates parkinson like symptoms. Since world war 1 they have noticed the comparison to shell shock symptoms and parkinsons symptoms. Eat a lead bullet and leave it in and you have a lead implant generating metallosis. This logic train deserves some looking into.
Grants for R&D? possibly. I've seen something on Sonny's CV that points in that direction. My focus on speculation in that area was more along the lines of products that could be developed and utilized outside of the core Amedica product goals that utilize the antibacterial and antiviral aspects, such as biological warfare and rampant disease out breaks we have to come in and mop up, federally funded, like ebola outbreaks.
Some of these patients have Aids or Hep etc. This is getting all over tools. As a doctor they're asking you to cover yourself and your hospital in communicable diseases and infected bodily fluids on a daily basis. Go in and clean a room filled with bodily fluids. Your gut reaction is a natural response of disgust and fear. That's an evolved response, like not eating rotten meat. Yet this is the level of exposure a doctor goes through. Look at the cleaning process of Ebola outbreaks. There's protective measures and a decontamination process for the workers.
As a patient they're asking even more from an exposure stand point. Vehicle mechanics is a little easier to visualize contamination. Look at your local lube shop. Oil gets everywhere. Now imagine this oil as a communicable disease.
If they sell I hope they don't go straight cash and cash me out with a stock conversion. I don't want off this ride. From my cold dead hands at this point. In the sale agreement it discusses CTL being the broker of all SiNi spinal application third party use. They must do due diligence to acquire all they can. So this is not a "CTL is the only supplier of SiNi spine" kind of deal.
The deal also straps CTL down with any doctors that are getting paid for licensing and rights of IP. That's at least the top doc on dollars for docs. Read some pages back in a filing he's previously been taking a stock option in lieu of cash. So that's coming off the books if you where unaware.
For previous stock holders wanting to know how they got burnt. Looks like it had nothing to do with SiNi. If the idea behind this was to incorporate SiNi into US spine IP.. however. Chon would have to be fully aware of whatever threats are being made in the disclosure and perhaps this fantasy may live on through Chon`s maneuvering abilities now that he takes control of everything US spine and is looking to incorporate Silicon nitride into his product line.
SiNi plated screws and tools such as the Javelin MIS that mysteriously disappeared. Approached investor relations about it's disappearance and no response. I think I've answered this for myself.
Some info. I found interesting from the sale.
https://investors.amedica.com/all-sec-filings/content/0001493152-18-014199/0001493152-18-014199.pdf
"Seller shall defend, indemnify and
hold harmless Buyer, from and against any and all Damages asserted against or incurred by such Buyer Indemnitees by
reason of or resulting from:
(i) all pending or threatened Actions against Amedica or US Spine, including but not limited to, pending or threatened
Actions involving Trace Cawley and any Actions disclosed on Schedule 3.8; and
(j) that certain Distribution and Marketing Agreement, effective as of April 14, 2016, by and between Amedica Corporation
and Shandong Weigao Orthopedic Device Company Limited
So who is Trace Cowley? 30 US spine patents are inherited by CTL through US spine. Most of these patents have Trace's name in them.
Possibly why Amedica was not able to fully utilize the US spine acquisition. They could not get dragged through the court process.
Although Spinal SiNi Outperforms it's competitor materials I think it's before it's time. Too many doctors comfortable with PEEK and Titanium implants. We don't see ceramicised metals penetrating here. That's the closest comparison to Silicon Nitride. Any one with a good head would have realized to ease doctors feet into the field with Doped Peek and SiNi plated Titanium and rework their products for sales. Then let them ask themselves why not go full SiNi?
So why not? My guess is they needed the data for solid and porous in vivo and put their limited resources pushing in that single direction. I feel the new plan is the push towards dental. Within dental is veiled prospects of a push toward SiNi coatings. CTL is killing at least two birds with one stone,Purely on the push forward in technological application. the aforementioned Dental manufacturing joint venture and, my guess, reworking their existing CTL products to include doped PEEK.
Pretty obvious why they would need the Solid SiNi In vivo data to any one paying attention. The projected push of hips was 2018 2019. It's in whatever stage of development. My guess at this point, with Amedica's eyes always on this prize. Late stage.
Same with dental. It's in some stage of development that I doubt is square one.
everything seems to be developing nicely and pushing forward. From continued raw tech. development,The state of their financial books to market penetration ability they're on a clear path I feel.
I don't think Sonny was referring to Magna on his comments of toxic financing during the conference call. I had my doubts on Magna group but they seem to be looking towards the same target Amedica is looking towards on how to grow and survive with their position. Probably related to previous offerings with preferred or these same older firms that funded lending, purchasing more through the recent Magna offering. What makes me say this is comments Sonny made about looking for counsel on the best steps moving forward toward a CTL deal (one heck of a deal for the future of CTL in my opinion. Hats off to Chon for his business acumen. We're obviously in good hands with him at the helm of deals)Obviously a very fortuitous and mutually beneficial arrangement for both companies goals. You would not seek such counsel with Death spiral financing, nor would they be able to offer any useful advice I assume. Who knows maybe you do, just doesn't seem right in my mind to do so.
We sit here and cheer lead these companies hoping they get their stuff together. Hoping H1 is a step toward SiNi,knowing the in vivo in vitro discrepency that leads to phase changes and fracture with ceramacised aluminum. Hoping ceramic slurry is a step in the right direction. but the only one publicly stepping up to the plate is CTL who has no skin in the game regarding chrome cobalt or biolox. They deserve some allegiance on the spinal front from amedica in my opinion.
The contour on the cup. Think leg splits where the stem rises up and comes in contact with the outer edge of the cup, without this contour. Could cause squeaking, wear particulate or fracture.
curiosity killed the cat on this H1 study. Which company is behind it? who has patents for Biolox delta coating, HA coating and Ceramic on Ceramic?