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.
spook...Response to your points:
1) Prior to implementing the Executive Compensation packages and the Performance Share Grant to Dr. Frudakis, the two largest shareholders in the company would have been Dr. Frudakis at approx. 35,000,000 shares and his father at approx. 30,000,000 shares, or a total of 65,000,000 shares. Given the above, would you consider it wise on their parts to implement a fundraising option that was about to place 157,000,000 shares in the hands of a few outside investors?
2) Your second point goes directly to the recognition of the difference between a Development Stage Company and a Commercial Enterprise. If we had been investing in a full-fledged commercial business these past three years, I would agree wholeheartedly with you. But DNAPrint has until very recently been strictly a Development Stage Company. It's products are complex in nature (meaning they have a long development cycle), and in the case of both forensics and pharmacogenetics they directly, and potentially severely, impact people's lives (that includes both positively if they are correct, or negatively if they are wrong). By their very nature, DNAPrint's products carry a heavy burden. The consequences of a wrong result are severe. This again would extend the development cycle.
You are free to look at this any way you'd like. I see it this way. My money, and the money of all of the other investors to this point has gone to fund the Development Stage. We, in essence, own the platform and the few existing early stage products. If we had all voted no last spring, the company might have gone belly up, in which case they would have sold the assets (including the intellectual property), and I may or may not have realized my initial investment. But that was an option. Alternatively, they may have severely trimmed expenses and managed to slowly but surely grow revenue to become self-sustaining. But that path would have retarded long term growth prospects. Either way, I wouldn't have gained much.
I voted to increase the authorization because that created the means to the capital required to take us to the commercial business stage. Am I sharing the pie with another group of investors? Absolutely. Does that make my piece of the existing pie smaller? Absolutely. But with proper management and proper funding I am betting that the growth of the pie will far outstrip the piece I'm giving up. And I recognize that I need the new investors at this point, as much as they needed my initial investment to get things through development.
I AM pleased to see that the initial conversion rate is at $0.061. I don't think it a coincidence that the rate is equivalent to the existing share price. It would be hard to argue that one group of investors is being favored, i.e. PIPE investors over existing investors. Of course this is predicated on the share price moving upward from where it is, but it is my observation and speculation that the company DOES have news to announce, and business in the pipeline that will move us up from here.
If that's the case, anyone buying off the open market can expect the same gain moving forward that the PIPE investors will realize. What did Dr. Frudakis say in the TWST article, "We need to change our share structure and we need to do that in a way that doesn't alienate our existing investors." In order to do that, I think the first thing you do is make certain that the PIPE investors are coming in on par with the early stage longs.
From where I sit, given current revenues, near term growth prospects, and $8M cash I don't foresee additional dilution. IMO, this is it...until, of course, we "graduate" to a pharmaceutical company.
3) This one is answered in (2) above.
4) OK, I've got my fingers crossed too! lol As far as Dr. Frudakis doing what he plans to do, I think Gabriel and Gomez have that under control.
Later,
W2P
Ihopeyoudidn'tburnthemtoobadly
chig...Thanks, and I have a couple of questions for you.
In the work that you do, I would guess that you have been involved in similar PIPE's. It has been asserted that this is just an opportunity for the private investors to obtain and then dump shares into the market. So my questions are these:
1) I have seen the Executive Summary of the Confidential Private Placement Agreement, but not the agreement itself with the attending legalese. The Executive Summary spells out the formula for conversion of Preferred Shares to Common. I assume that the SEC has regulations governing disposition of PIPE shares, and further assume that even if converted to common, sale of the common shares would be restricted. Is this a reasonable assumption?
2) Do you see any strategic significance in the company using Preferred Shares, as opposed to Common Shares in executing this transaction? Could this have a bearing or be a precursor to the restructuring Tony Frudakis referred to in the TWST article?
Thanks in advance for your input.
Later,
W2P
spook...
The only way, the ONLY way they will be able to do that is if they see real growth in their revenue from products/services they create.
Agreed, and revenues ARE growing. They HAVE products/services. Acceleration of revenue growth requires capital. If successful, the PP provides that capital.
...not an artificially bloated bank account.
What is "artificial" about the ability of the company to convert authorized shares into $8M in necessary capital. Those authorized shares exist to permit investors to buy a share of the company. They wouldn't be buying a share of the company if they didn't anticipate a return on investment.
I think you're confused. "Artificial" would be for the company to assert that because it had a current share price of $0.06 and it had 100,000,000 authorized shares in reserve, that it therefore had $6,000,000 worth of net equity. Conversion of those shares to capital is where the rubber meets the road. There is nothing "artificial" about money in the bank.
Cash is the lifeblood of a company. $8M in the bank would mean tremendous life to a small company like DNAP. I don't know how anyone could argue that having adequate capital to run the business would be viewed negatively by the investment community.
DNAPrint doesn't need a "propped" up PPS - they need sustained growth.
My use of the word "prop" was in response to an unfounded assertion that the current share price is being artificially "propped" up. I was in NO WAY insinuating that the current price is being "propped" up, or that success with those listed items would "artificially prop up" the price. Perhaps a better way to phrase that would have been for me to say that the events I described will add to investor confidence in DNAPrint as a viable commercial enterprise, which in turn would tend to support the value of the stock.
You have no idea how the market would react to those scenarios.
You are correct in pointing out that the conclusion drawn is opinion on my part, but it is opinion supported by the facts underlying the questions. There is strong supporting (factual) evidence that ALL of those items are in process. If you'd like to argue that any of those items would have a deleterious effect on the market perception of DNAPrint, go right ahead. Frankly, I'd like to hear that one.
Lastly, I didn't spend any more time responding to td, for the simple reason that in order to accept any of the assertions he is making we have to believe that Athena Capital, Douglas Weiland, all of the private placement investors, Gabriel, Gomez, Tamborini, Tony Frudakis, not to mention Mark Shriver, DC Rao, Ramin Mirashemi, and the janitor at DNAPrint are all crooks whose sole purpose in life at this point is to steal from DNAPrint investors. I don't believe that and neither do you.
I am always open to serious discussion concerning the perceived positives and negatives at DNAPrint. You're welcome to take the negative side if that's your inclination. I can assure you that I read and consider thoughtful opposing arguments. But I will not be drawn into a useless argument based on unfounded accusation and innuendo. It's a waste of time.
Later,
W2P
tdiamonds...Because they are restricted.
The rest of your post illustrates that you are not interested in a civil discussion, and therefore, is not worthy of comment.
Later,
W2P
OT: bag8ger...Am I still "visible" to others? lol
Later,
W2P
spook...I told you already, NO. This entire line of discussion started when I posted the paragraph from the Newsletter wherein he states that they wouldn't anticipate generating any more than $1M from a warrants plan, but that if the shares were available, the opportunity exists to generate MUCH more. LOOK AT WHAT YOU VOTED ON. THIS FROM THE PROXY STATEMENT:
The Board believes that the additional shares of common stock resulting from the increase in authorized capital should be available for issuance from time to time as may be required for various purposes, including (a) the issuance of common stock and warrants pursuant to one or more capital-raising transactions, potentially including the Rights Offering described below, (b) the issuance of common stock in connection with financing or acquisition transactions and (c) the issuance or reservation of common stock for stock options and warrants. If no action is taken to increase the authorized common stock, we may be unable to raise capital to continue funding our operations, which will jeopardize our ability to operate as a going concern.
On December 12, 2002, the Board of Directors approved, in concept, a proposal to offer to the shareholders of the Company rights to purchase certain securities in the Company (the "Rights Offering"). Management and the Board of Directors believe such an offering will provide shareholders an opportunity to maintain their relative equity ownership percentage in the Company while providing a plan for the Company to fund its future operations. Management expects to spend considerable time and effort to structure the Rights Offering most advantageously. The Company may engage investment bankers or other financial advisors and will obtain appropriate support from its outside legal counsel and accountants. Before undertaking this effort, the Board of Directors seeks approval from the shareholders of the increase in authorized capital necessary for implementation of the Rights Offering.
In general, the Board of Directors anticipates that the Rights Offering will work in the manner described in this paragraph, but the Board of Directors may modify its terms or decide to implement a different capital-raising approach if it determines that such modifications or other approaches are in the best interests of the shareholders. As currently contemplated, the Board of Directors would determine a record date for the Rights Offering. All shareholders of record as of that date would receive one Right for each share of Common Stock they own. Each Right would entitle the eligible shareholder to purchase a Unit consisting of a combination of one or more shares of Common Stock and one or more warrants to purchase additional shares of Common Stock. Shareholders will be under no obligation to exercise their Rights to purchase Units. Any unexercised Rights may, at the Company's option, be either cancelled or offered for sale to third parties.
Let me REPEAT:
but the Board of Directors may modify its terms or decide to implement a different capital-raising approach if it determines that such modifications or other approaches are in the best interests of the shareholders.
IMO, the plan currently in place is much more in my interest than allowing YOU to purchase $0.015 shares that you would have dumped at your first opportunity to profit. Apparently, in the end, the Board came to the same conclusion.
When you can present an argument that describes a warrants plan that would generate $10M, using only 157M shares, and guarantees me that those shares aren't going to be dumped into the market for at least six months, then we have something to discuss. Until then, you will be going "round and round" by yourself...as usual.
Later,
W2P
hwan...I would guess news will come when the placement is completed. Should be sometime after October 1, 2003.
Later,
W2P
td...I don't believe you are capable of dealing in "facts", but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for purposes of discussion. I'm interested in your opinion on these events:
1) What would you say the reaction will be from the investment community when DNAP shows $8M in cash on their Balance Sheet?
2) What will be the reaction from the investment community when the three (3) NIH applications that Senecio is working on for DNAPrint become public knowledge?
3) What will be the reaction from the investment community when the underlying details of the DNA Phenomics relationship become known?
4) What will be the reaction from the investment community when we learn the details of Phase II of the recent NIJ sub-contract?
5) What will be the reaction from the investment community when DNAPrint announces which pharmaceutical companies will be using them to generate clinical trial data?
6) What will be the reaction from the investment community when DNAPrint announces the forensics partners that Dr. Frudakis mentioned in the TWST article that will help DNAP expand their forensics market?
The problem with your "facts" TD is that they are not facts at all. They are primarily opinion and innuendo, based on the underlying premise that DNAP is some type of scam company whose sole intent is to generate shares so as to steal money from their investors. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Every one of the six events I listed is in process. Every one of those six events would "prop" up the PPS. The only way I can accept your scenario would be to ignore them all.
Others can do what they will, I see money in the bank and more on the way. I've got the next six months to change my decision, but right now I don't think that will be necessary.
Later,
W2P
td...Of course you'd like nothing better than a repeat of the debacle last January that drove the price down. That would certainly lead to a self fullfilling prophesy on your part.
The flaw in your argument is that the reset is now set for six months. I don't have to make a decision right now. And if further developments don't materialize, I am in a position to protect my own downside.
But with the developments taking place with Scenecio and DNA Phenomics, and with the company showing $8M cash at the next 10Q, I don't anticipate having to take that course.
Later,
W2P
spook...If I plan a vacation to Colorado in March and promise my kids I'll take them, but in March the area we were to vacation in is suffering from wildfires that last for several months, should I have issued them all helmets and axes and gone anyway? If we didn't go, was it a lie in the first place?
Later,
W2P
eatyourvegetablesormoveoutofthehouse
frog...The document they are referring to is the Executive Summary for the Placement. If you e-mail Athena and ask for it, they will send it to you. A friend of mine did just that. It has a nice new DNAP logo on the cover page.
Good luck,
W2P
spook...Looks to me like he got $10M, not $1M, and used a minimum number of shares. You gonna send a complaint to the SEC that he should've issued more shares and got less money? You gonna tell'm that would have been the "ethical" thing to do? lol
Did you and the rest of your BILLION share boys ever stop to think that those millions of shares you dumped that drove the share price under $0.02 had an impact on whether it made sense to implement a warrants plan? That the constant, vociferous bashing for months on end may have had an impact?
I repeat, with the share price at $0.02, you can't entice "common" shareholders to buy at anything more than $0.01-0.015. To get $10M at that price would have required the WHOLE BILLION shares. Instead, we have a PP with buyers paying $0.061/share and it only costs us 157,000,000 shares to get $10M. What is your problem?
BTW, that's a rhetorical question.
Later,
W2P
stopactinglikethescarecrow
spook...As a shareholder, would you rather they sold 500,000,000 shares at $0.02, or 157,000,000 at $0.063? Which would you say was in the better interest of the "common" shareholder?
This is not hard to figure out.
Later,
W2P
frog...The document states that "the initial conversion price was calculated as of the date of this Memorandum. The Conversion Price is currently $0.061 per share, where it shall remain unless lowered at the next reset date."
That means that this was executed at a time in the recent past when the preceding 20 day moving average share price was 0.072. I understand from someone who e-mailed Athena today, that Round I of the placement is scheduled for completion by October 1, 2003 (only two weeks from today). If required, a second round would complete by November 1, 2003. Based on that, I'd say this has been in the works since July or August some time.
Actually, I believe this has been planned for much longer. I think I now understand what Dr. Frudakis was referring to when he made this statement in the January Newsletter:
How much could the warrants plan net the company? It would seem quite optimistic to expect this plan to bring more than $1M to the company, but if the increase in shares is approved, the shares will be available to bring much more. What would DNAPrint be worth if we had $10M in the bank?
Hhhhhmmmmm...$8M private placement coupled with $2M warrants to PP holders = $10M
Later,
W2P
frog...Not sure where you're coming up with your numbers. The conversion price is initially set at 0.061. That covers the next six month period. So assuming that ALL private placement holders converted, that amounts to 163,934 shares per $10,000 invested, or 131,147,530 shares. Exercise of the warrants could add another 26,316,000 for a total of 157,463,530 shares. Of course, the total could go higher if future resets lower the conversion price for the units.
IMO, the pragmatic way to look at this is that these investors are buying shares at the same price we can buy them today. Bag8ger, if the price is $50 five years from now, your 0.06 shares will also be worth $50 each. Are you suggesting that their shares shouldn't be worth the same?
The protection they get that you don't is on the down side. If the market price declines, they will be insulated through the reset and the potential to convert at a lower price. They also receive the upside bonus of being able to excercise their warrants, but that will cost them another $2,000,000. I would point out that if you see events that lead you to believe the share price will advance beyond 0.076, you will be free to purchase additional shares on the open market at that time. Again, the only thing you don't get is the guaranteed right to purchase at that price.
This placement seems to me to do a pretty good job of protecting the investment of the existing shareholders. I would also say that if this allows the company to gain the necessary capital it needs, and to do it at 0.061/share, then that is alot better than some of the scenarios that have been floated on these boards recently. I have seen many suggesting that they would have to sell shares at 0.01-0.02/share. I was thinking myself along the lines of a 40% discount to market. I was happy to see 15%.
Lastly, the executive summary points out that there will be a total of six reset calculations. Since reset calculations will be made semi-annually, that tells me that whatever it is they are going to do with these funds, the results are expected within a three year window.
These are my initial thoughts. Feel free to respectfully disagree.
Later,
W2P
ifida...No, you're not reading it correctly.
Later,
W2P
What's Jack up to? From the Centrex 10Q:
The Company and Mr. Jack Luchese have entered into an amended employment agreement effective March 24, 2003, whereby Mr. Luchese has agreed to become Chief Executive Officer of the Company on or before January 1, 2004, subject to certain funding conditions. However, the arrangements are being placed on hold pending renegotiation of the agreement. During the renegotiation process, Mr. Luchese is not serving the Company on a formal basis.
And later this:
The Preferred Stock Owned By Jack Luchese Is Convertible Into Common Stock Representing 15% Of The Company's Issued And Outstanding Shares of Common Stock At The Date Of Conversion. If Mr. Luchese Converts His Preferred Stock Into Common Stock, His Ownership May Allow Him To Exercise Substantial Influence Over Our Business And The Election Of Directors. Jack Luchese, who is presently a consultant to the Company and intends to become CEO of the Company if the Company can satisfy the funding condition of his agreement, recently purchased 100,000 shares of our preferred stock. The preferred stock is convertible into shares of common stock representing 15% of the Company's issued and outstanding shares of common stock at the date of conversion. If Mr. Luchese converts his preferred stock into common stock, his ownership may allow him to exercise substantial influence over our business and the election of directors. If the Company has not raised at least $2,000,000 on or before January 1, 2004, the Company may repurchase 50,000 shares of Mr. Luchese's preferred stock at a purchase price of $25,000. Mr. Luchese will then own preferred stock convertible into shares of common stock representing 7.5% of the Company's issued and outstanding shares of common stock at the date of conversion. If Mr. Luchese converts his preferred stock into common stock after the Company's repurchase, his ownership may allow him to exercise substantial influence over our business and the election of directors.
And what has Centrex been up to this quarter?
Centrex Announces Closure of Private Placement with Joseph Stevens & Co.
Monday August 25, 6:00 am ET
TULSA, Okla.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Aug. 25, 2003--Centrex (OTCBB:CNEX - News) today announced that the Company has raised approximately $730,000 in a private placement through Joseph Stevens & Co., Inc. In light of the JSCI financing, the Company has terminated its investment banking arrangement with H.D. Brous & Co. According to Dr. Thomas R. Coughlin, Jr., Centrex's CEO, the funds will be used to support ongoing research at Los Alamos National Laboratory, to fund recently announced development agreements with Stratos Product Development, LLC and Micronics, Inc., and for general company operations. "We are attempting to accelerate the development of a highly advanced technology platform into products that will become powerful weapons against bioterrorism. In addition, mature versions of the technology have potential widespread applications in food and water processing, screening of the blood supply and the field of general DNA testing."
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/030825/255037_1.html
Centrex Strategic Partner Bio-Defense Research Group Wins Federal Contract
Tuesday September 9, 8:35 am ET
TULSA, Okla.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 9, 2003--Centrex, Inc. (OTCBB:CNEX - News) today announced that its strategic partner, Bio-Defense Research Group, Inc. (BDRGI) of Mitchellville/Upper Marlboro, Md., won a contract valued at up to $4.5 million from the General Service Administration's Federal Supply Service. Centrex and BDRGI recently announced that they had entered into a strategic alliance to explore the joint applications, development and marketing of their complimentary technologies. Under the terms of the alliance, both companies will focus on their individual areas of expertise while investigating potential collaborations that would serve to deliver to the marketplace complete biological detection and filtering systems. The details of the BDRGI federal contract are unavailable at present.
In conjunction with the Companies' strategic alliance agreement, Centrex CEO Thomas R. Coughlin, Jr., M.D. was named to the Board of Directors of BDRGI. BDRGI CEO, Preston D. McGee, Sr., Ph.D. was named to the Technical Advisory Board of Centrex, and not to the Board of Directors as was previously announced.
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/030909/95420_1.html
Looks like Centrex may come up with the $2 million it needs by January 1, 2004, which would give Luchese the option to become CEO depending on the terms of his re-re-negotiated agreement.
Later,
W2P
For those that are looking for a good explanation of why DNAP developed their ADMIXMAP, this paper is an excellent source of information.
In addition to providing a good technical explanation, it is fairly easy reading for those that may be less technically inclined:
http://hg-wen.uchicago.edu/pubs/ober101.pdf
Later,
W2P
ifida...Can you say Senecio? lol IBM? Palm? eom
Ituccilnv...Read my discussion with stak. Should answer your questions. And to anyone else reading this, if I've got that wrong please pipe up.
Thanks,
W2P
stakddek...Could be another year or so to issuance. But Publication is a very significant step and provides significantly greater assurance to anyone looking to do business with DNAP based on their intellectual property portfolio. It is one thing to say you filed xyz patent, it is quite another for it to be published by the USPTO.
Later,
W2P
stakddek...This is part of the normal patent process. This is actually a VERY good sign. It indicates that the Patent Office has reviewed the claims and finds them on the surface to be sustainable as unique. The publication process allows others in the field to review the claims and file prior art objections if they can. At least that's the way I understand the process. Anyone with better knowledge, feel free to correct me.
Later,
W2P
mingwan0...That would appear to be the case. This probably places me somewhere between a "turnip" and "banana"! lol
Later,
W2P
mingwan0...But this one doesn't appear to be on the website:
This application claims benefit of the priority of U.S. Provisional Application Serial No. 60/274,686 filed Mar. 8, 2001.
This patent actually relates to identification of "true" SNP's versus "pseudo" SNP's which would confound attempts to draw useful conclusions from a genotyping study.
Later,
W2P
mingwan0...OK, maybe I DID. This from the patent app:
This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application Serial No. 60/338,771 filed Dec. 3, 2001.
This from the website:
METHODS FOR THE IDENTIFICATION OF GENETIC FEATURES FOR COMPLEX GENETICS CLASSIFIERS
Application No.: 60/338,771
Oh well, I'm learning to wear humility. LOL
Later,
W2P
OT: mingwan0...I didn't just fall of the turnip truck, you know! LOL
Later my friend,
W2P
mingwan0...This must be the "Haploscope" patent. I don't believe this one is even listed on the company website.
Later,
W2P
Correction...The technology was sold to a major US company in 2000 (Affymetrix perhaps), which, in turn, licensed it to Orchid (was this the technology license whose payment schedule was renegotiated in July? See Orchid most recent 10Q). Either way, it was developed at QUT, sold to a major US firm, then licensed to Orchid by that US firm.
This is not some special technique developed specifically for heat degraded samples, it is good old fashioned SNP analysis, which should be superior to STR with degraded samples because it requires less material and fewer sequences.
Later,
W2P
mingwan0/GoldEagle...The technique that Orchid has been using on the badly degraded samples was developed by Queensland University in Australia, who licensed the technology to Orchid in September of 2002 specifically for the identification of remains from the 9/11 disaster. Here's the link to the QUT PR announcing the licensing agreement with Orchid:
http://www.news.qut.edu.au/cgi-bin/WebObjects/News.woa/wa/goNewsPage?newsEventID=402
You posted:
"City forensic scientists are awaiting approval from state authorities to use an advanced DNA analysis method called single nucleotide polymorphisms, which was adapted from a process used for disease research and requires less genetic material."
But later, TeamLasVegas posted this article, which provides additional detail as to what has been transpiring (great "bubble" Team!):
Experts Eye New DNA Method
By Glenn Thrush
Staff Writer
September 10, 2003, 4:29 PM EDT
Scientists aren't sure if a new method of salvaging damaged DNA will turn out to be the key to identifying hundreds more World Trade Center victims or lead up a biochemical blind alley.
Last fall, Bob Shaler called scientists at a Dallas company called Orchid Biosciences, who had experimented with using tiny DNA snippets called "SNIPs" to ID remains that couldn't be analyzed using other techniques.
Shaler -- the city's chief forensic biologist, who has collaborated with almost every DNA expert in the United States in his 30 years as a scientific sleuth -- hoped SNIPs would yield dozens of new identifications before the end of the year.
So far, there hasn't been a single one.
"It's turned out to be the most frustrating thing I've had to deal with in the whole two years," Shaler said.
It's taken a year for Shaler and U.S. government scientists to test and re-test the technique, which involves analyzing smaller, more numerous DNA segments than used in standard methods. Now the hang-up is developing a complex computer program to read the SNIPs.
"I'm not mad," Shaler said. "Just impatient."
Over the next six months, Orchid will analyze thousands of trade center remains, said the company's executive director Mark Stolorow, who first met Shaler at the University of Pittsburgh in the late '60s.
Even then, there's no guarantee the process will work. And technicians may simply find that the remains belonged to people who already have been identified.
"This is where the rubber meets the road," Stolorow said. "We'll finally see how effective this stuff really is."
It looks to me as if they have been testing the QUT method for the past year and ran into a few problems. From the bolded text describing the "hang-up", I wonder whether DNAP might now be involved.
The statements concerning the "testing and re-testing", along with the fact that "over the next six months" Orchid "will be" analyzing thousands of remains, suggests to me that they may have switched gears and are "re-testing" again, only this time perhaps with their "hang-up" resolved.
Later,
W2P
What Happened in May?
Thought I'd post some Historical Data to illustrate the significance of the month of May 2003. We received one PR early in the month that caused the volume to jump on May 2, 2003, but overall it really represented a turning point in the daily share volume. Back in March and April, there was scarcely a day when daily volume surpassed 1 million shares, let alone 2 million. In May, there were numerous 2+ million days, a 6+ million share day, a 7+ million share day, and of course May 30, 2003 when a 10 million share after hours trade took the volume to nearly 13 million shares for the day.
Interestingly, it was the following week, the first week in June, when all hell broke loose.
30-May-03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 12,720,800 0.03
29-May-03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 1,448,200 0.03
28-May-03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 536,500 0.03
27-May-03 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 1,631,600 0.03
23-May-03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 796,500 0.02
22-May-03 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 1,525,800 0.03
21-May-03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 2,977,300 0.02
20-May-03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 1,593,600 0.03
19-May-03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 735,900 0.03
16-May-03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 1,102,500 0.03
15-May-03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 1,271,800 0.03
14-May-03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 2,633,600 0.03
13-May-03 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.03 6,412,100 0.03
12-May-03 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 1,940,800 0.03
9-May-03 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.02 2,001,400 0.02
8-May-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 2,169,100 0.02
7-May-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 939,000 0.02
6-May-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 2,052,700 0.02
5-May-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 2,127,900 0.02
2-May-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 7,384,300 0.02
DNAPrint Launches Ancestry 2.0 Forensic Profiling Service and Immediately Impacts Several Criminal Investigations
Thursday May 2, 2003
1-May-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 1,193,500 0.02
30-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 572,700 0.02
29-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 1,373,300 0.02
28-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 1,207,100 0.02
25-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 1,815,900 0.02
24-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 1,402,800 0.02
23-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 835,500 0.02
22-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 1,370,200 0.02
21-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 1,875,100 0.02
17-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 1,233,700 0.02
16-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 888,800 0.02
15-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 930,500 0.02
14-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 1,035,500 0.02
11-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 871,600 0.02
10-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 380,400 0.02
9-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 992,800 0.02
DNAPrint Genomics Appoints Richard Gabriel As President and CEO
April 9, 2003
8-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 692,100 0.02
7-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 981,700 0.02
4-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 440,900 0.02
3-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 1,251,500 0.02
2-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 778,200 0.02
1-Apr-03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 475,800 0.02
Later,
W2P
Team...Another one of those "bubble" things. When you type in DNAPrint genomics, it is not matching DNAPrint, it is matching genomics...you get the same results. When you type in Neogenomics, Inc. or Genomedics, Inc. you are not matching either of the first terms. You are matching "Inc." and it is providing the results.
Sorry again, but DNAPrint alone does not produce a match. Try it, you'll see.
I am certain a relationship exists. But you cannot prove it using the search function on the website.
Later,
W2P
2yrs2retire...
Makes you wonder if Tony's presentation at the end of July gave weight to this presentation.
It appears to me that Tony's presentation at the end of July gave "birth" to this presentation.
Later,
W2P
Doug...BTW, THIS is why it is important for DNAPrint to do Conferences like the AFDAA. This woman was probably an attendee at Tony's presentation and now she's a disciple spreading the word to hundreds of others in the field of criminal justice.
Later,
W2P
DougS...Did you catch this?
"Scalise told of a case in Lousiana in which a rape victim described a white male suspect in his early 30s, but DNA tests showed a black man in his early 40s.
DNA tests showed a black man "in his early 40's?" Did we tell them his approximate age as well as race?
Later,
W2P
Miss Scarlet...I take it to mean that the Investor Relations function, accessed by e-mailing dnap@dnaprint.com, is being handled by a contract service. This probably includes the production and mailing of Investor Packets, etc.
Later,
W2P
OT: Wonder what's up with Nanogen? Volume 4-5 times normal, PPS up 20%, no news.
Later,
W2P
Arch...I've seen this posted before. What is described in this document is a research proposal to develop a phenotype map of Drosophila. IMO, the reference to DNAPrint in this document is unconnected to any of the information that comes before it.
This researcher, as part of his project proposal, has conducted a rudimentary search for the various phenotype databases in existence to, IMO, demonstrate that the Drosophila database doesn't exist. He may also be using the alternate databases to gain clues as to how to organize his own project.
IMO, the reference to DNAPrint in this document is not any different than us doing a Google search on the word phenotype and cataloguing the search results. That is what it appears has been done here, and the PhenomeSNiP database was one of the results his search returned.
Sorry, I just don't think it's anything more than that.
Later,
W2P
From the FAQ Section of AncestryByDNA:
Has DNAPrint published any of this work in the scientific literature?
Our first manuscript will appear in the Journal of Forensic Sciences, later this summer. This paper describes merely a fraction of the steps we have taken in developing Ancestrybydna 2.0:Frudakis, T., Venkateswarlu, K., Thomas, M., Gaskin, B., Ginjupalli, S., Gunturi, S., Ponnuswamy, V., Natarajan, S., and P. Nachimuthu. A Classifier for the SNP-based Inference of Ancestry. J. Forensic Sci, July 2003 48:
A second manuscript, describing the validation data we have generated, is currently in review and is expected to appear later in the Winter.
Later,
W2P
DNAP updating the look at AncestryByDNA website:
http://www.ancestrybydna.com
Later,
W2P
Philip...I'm not certain where you came up with all of this in response to my rather simple post about the title changes for some key players. But let me say this in response to your concerns. The interviewer from TWST asked this question:
TWST: What are the goals for the Investor Relations Program?
And the answer was this:
Dr. Frudakis: That is part of the plan. Our investment banking group is raising several million for our near-term needs. But we are a penny stock and we need to change that. We need to change our share structure and we have to do that in a way that doesn't alienate existing investors. We need to be traded on a better exchange than the OTC Bulletin Board. And we need to have all of those things coupled with the graduation of the company to a pharmaceutical company. So, it is not going to be a bunch of little changes that lead to DNAPrint being a NASDAQ stock. It is going to be a couple of very dramatic changes.
In terms of investment relations, right now we have an investment banking group working with us recruiting new investors but the maintenance of the public investors is contracted out to a professional firm.
Look at the question again, and look at the answer. Seems to me that the second paragraph (in bold) was a direct answer to the question. The first paragraph has very little to do with the question asked.
It seems to me that Dr. Frudakis just took that opportunity to let potential investors in on the short term plans of the company. If we take that as a premise and expand on it, Dr. Frudakis starts that paragraph by telling us the things that follow are all part of "the plan". Further down in the first paragraph he gives us this:
And we need to have all of those things coupled with the graduation of the company to a pharmaceutical company.
I didn't catch it the first time I read it, but as I re-read, I got the impression that the "millions" being raised are an integral part of "all of those things". I mean, let's face it, if the company was executing a plan to restructure, escape the OTC, and graduate to a pharmaceutical company should we believe that these PIPE investors would be unaware of the elements of that plan? Nope, so I have to conclude that they are an integral part of it and thereby, an integral part of "all of those things" he refers to.
Secondly, if the company were about to place it's shareholders in "dire straits", how effective do you think they'd have been in finding the deeper pockets type of investors to buy shares in the PIPE? Not very, in my estimation. These are sophisticated investors and are not likely to put up big bucks unless they're pretty certain there will be a handsome reward.
Sorry, can't go along with your doom and gloom scenario. Personally, I'm looking for some sort of dramatic company restructuring being one of the events Dr. Frudakis was referring to, and the second being the partnership/merger/acquisition of the drug pipeline that takes DNAP to NASDAQ.
Later,
W2P