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.
I proposed what I did because I believe it would keep the overall shares outstanding to under what would require a shareholders vote to increase the O/S. I also believe that with a BP partner and $750 million to work with, they could afford the necessary trials, gain approval of DCVax-L, then have substantial revenue coming in from sales.
I've seen partnerships of this sort used in the past where it went well for both the company, and the shareholders. In such a scenario I wouldn't tinder my shares, but it wouldn't surprise me of some of the corporate officers might not choose to, not because the company doesn't remain a good investment, but more a case of having the opportunity to diversify rather than having a very concentrated position if in fact that were the case.
Also, by having shareholders tinder half the shares, the total number to gain a 30% position in the company isn't nearly as great as if all the shares are newly issued. I see it as a good compromise position. Of course there is nothing mandatory about gaining 30% of the company, it's just a figure that I've seen used that give a partner substantial control. Most certainly they'd get one or more seats on the Board.
I don't think that shareholders would balk at raising the O/S to gain a partnership, but I believe a vote to do so complicates the arrangement, by structuring it as I did, I'm not sure if the company couldn't make such a partnership without a shareholder vote. No doubt, if the company is not bought out, at some point a vote to increase the authorized shares will occur, if for no other reason than to give the company some flexibility in financial negotiations.
'
I believe there is a right time for companies to dilute, I just hate to see it when the price is a tiny fraction of what I believe it will be in the not too distant future. Companies have a hard time turning down the MM's or brokerages when they've already got the shares sold if the company agrees to issue them. Companies like having Institutional investors, so they're willing to give them a sweetheart deal to bring them in. I believe before most offerings become public all, or nearly all the share in the offering are spoken for.
Gary
I agree that $5 for a partnership offer would be a fair price, the partner could take roughly a 30% position in the company for 300 million shares at $5 a share. If half the share came as newly issued shares by the company, the company would receive $750 million, while shareholders tindered the other 150 million shares. It would give the company all the funds needed to put DCVax-Direct through trials and gain approval of DCVax-L.
I believe such an offer would be warranted by TLD is it's as good as we believe it is. Effectively with roughly 30% of the O/S our partner is largely in control of the company, as it's nearly impossible to beat the partner in a voting situation. With such an arrangement, as the company moved toward BLA submission the share price could approach $10 which is the lowest threshold for a $20 a share buyout offer, roughly a $20 billion offer.
Gary
Snow,
You may very well be right, I am looking to see profits dramatically increasing in the third quarter as that's when Gary stated they'll be producing 25 units a month and growing by 40% monthly. I figured that would really make the profits huge in the third quarter and provide a reason to value the stock at a P/E of 30 or even more based on continued monthly growth.
I believe that when investors can actually evaluate the company on the basis of growing profits and P/E, rather than potential, the price will grow dramatically as it will no longer be based on future potential alone, it will be seen to becoming a cash cow, very profitable, and growing dramatically month over month and quarter over quarter.
While I believe our potential to be over $1 by year's end, I wouldn't argue that the dollar figures we earn might not warrant a price substantially higher than that. Hardly a week goes by that we don't get news of another new distributor, or additional hospital installation, or both. I can't say that will continue through the end of the year, but with 25 units a month predicted for July, the number of hospital installations are most surely growing, though many of these could be headed for the U.K., we really don't know that for certain. Many larger hospitals will need multiple units, so you can't know how many hospitals will be added at 25 a month, and of course not all these units will necessarily go to hospitals.
Judging by DE's comments, the company may have some new devices they'll be marketing as well. Time will tell, but I believe we're growing dramatically in so many ways, we concentrate on healthcare, but in reality the increased use in agriculture, petroleum, etc may surprise us all as new figures come in. Distributors like DE certainly are looking to bring substantial growth beyond use of the equipment for sanitizing, though he certainly won't ignore it. This company greatest growth may be its distribution channels where equipment it supplies it's distributors result in continuous earnings from those distributors with little or no work required by the company.
Gary
It's my belief that when a company drops the O/S to anything like 14 million shares it won't be 3 years before it's back to 50 to 100 million, and that means the original shareholders equity is reduced to a tiny fraction of the total in the company.
A R/S that brought the share count to 70 million, i.e. 1 for 2, would be more reasonable, and if it did grow to near 150 million, at least the original shareholders would have nearly 50% of the equity.
I intend to vote no, and hope others will join me.
Gary
I've only recently invested here at the suggestion of someone who's advice I respect. I'm not thrilled by the perspective of a vote authorizing a reverse split so far in advance of the extended deadline imposed by the Nasdaq. I wanted to see the thought of others on this item.
My thoughts are twofold, for one, only a 2 for 3, or 1 for 2 would be all that's necessary to achieve over a $1 based on current prices, why vote on a 1 for 10. The other is it's much earlier than necessary, and on more than one occasion I've seen the reverse split done well before it was needed, and in fact it may not have been needed at all.
I welcome others thoughts.
Gary
I believe you're right, we know the Annual Report will show losses for the year, in the quarterly we were told that March was profitable, but probably not sufficiently so as to overcome losses in January and February. The thing is, while the financials show what's occurred in the past, the company is permitted to discuss the present, as well as plans for the future, and I believe both are quite positive.
The question may be, does the language change much between what they finally say when the Annual Report is released roughly 3 months late, or will they add more if the quarterly is released very shortly after the Annual Report.
We're only 3 weeks away from being in the third quarter, that's when I really believe we'll see how much revenue is really increasing for the company. Of course, even if they're right on time, it will be early November before we see results of the third quarter. Of course at that time all focus will be on politics, but the report is likely to be out after the election.
Gary
DE,
After reading what you intend to provide on opening, can you tell us more about the unit you're talking about selling for under $1000. Is it actually made by the company, or someone else under licence to use their name and labeling.
Thanks,
Gary
I've previously gathered that all sorts of things have occurred in the past, I'm fine with that. I believe that as of today, we ought to pay more attention to the future than rehash the past.
I don't know that the company would announce doing the soft lock while getting what's needed to make it a hard lock, but I suspect that it's happening. Why? Because that should shorten the time between hard lock and the receipt of the data from the contractor that's putting it all together.
I would hope that very shortly the company gets the 10-Q out as it's hanging over us, and will be until it's issued. Get that done, announce hard lock, and I believe you'll see the stock dramatically higher as we wait for TLD.
Gary
It appears to me that many of PCTL's distributors have themselves purchased or leased bulk production units and are selling our product line utilizing their equipment. I cannot tell anyone what PCTL's arrangement with them is, but I've got to believe that for every gallon they make, PCTL earns something. How big is that something, I cannot say, nor do I know if each of the distributorship have the same terms, or if they vary greatly.
What's important is that PCTL developed a manufacturing process, they developed specific products, and they've licensed them to others to use, as well as producing substantial quantities themselves. It's almost like what's discussed in any multi level sales organization, they're profiting by incorporating the efforts of others.
As a consumer, if you're looking to purchase a gallon of HOCL, does it matter to you if it comes directly from PCTL, or one of the distributors licensed to make it. I don't think so, as long as the quality of the product is consistent regardless of who you're purchasing it from.
I suspect that we're greatly underestimating the total volume of HOCL being made by PCTL and all of it's distributors. Certainly PCTL may make more per gallon out of what comes out of company owned units, but they're doing nothing for the distributors that are making it as well, and they're seeing something from them for all that they make.
In the case of the new units going into hospitals, I believe that PCTL is responsible for manufacturing them all. Once again they may not make quite as much if a distributor is selling and servicing them, as if they're doing it themselves, but once again the distributor is doing a fair share of the work, so both should profit. I really cannot say if the company sold any units directly to the hospital, most I've read about came through ACE. In some ways it's like purchasing a car, you really don't buy it from the manufacturer, you buy it from a dealer who has rights to sell and service what the manufacturer makes.
As companies go, PCTL has grown greatly in the last several months, yet I believe based on it's growth potential, you'd have to conclude it's still in it's infancy here in the U.S. and it essentially was just born in the U.K. and other places in the world.
I believe people like DE will see to it that many of the markets in his area are selling gallon bottles of the product, but it will take hundreds, or thousands like him before markets all over the country have it on their shelves. That's just the U.S., we're roughly 5% of the worlds population, I'd say we have plenty of room for growth.
Gary
I think we'd all agree that they need to get these things done, it really makes little difference what they say, people are waiting for them to be out. All the knowledgeable investors know that these reports won't yet show the company profitable, not for the year, not for the first quarter.
Quarterlies aren't filled by the money, if they were, we know January and February were down, but March was profitable. From all we can tell, February will be the last down month for the foreseeable future. Hopefully we won't experience a delay when second quarter results are due, that should be in August. Certainly between now and then the company will be able to talk about what's happening, but audited figures don't happen until the quarterly is released.
As for today, it looked for awhile like we might even close green, but in a dramatically down market, over 1800 on the Dow, we couldn't quite pull it off. It's Covid-19 that has the market down, and frankly Covid-19 is calling out more attention to proper sanitation. We don't need the entire market, just a nice niche where our product is clearly a leader should permit tremendous growth to continue.
Gary
While I believe news of data lock could come any days, I would hope that the 10-Q would come first so that no open questions will remain about what the company is doing. Now that LP is taking the CFO's position, there should be no reason she can't do whatever she wished to do in the 10-Q without a question from the CFO, the SEC might be a different matter, but she's not a fool, I expect she'll be able to explain what she did, and why she did it.
Frankly she may have done something wrong, I clearly didn't like the warrant extension which benefit her, but also many others, but she's to be credited with getting us to the point where we should have tremendous success. If she's violating the law in some action, I have no qualms with the SEC acting against her, but if what she's done was legal, but not very ethical, she'll get away with it, and if we're trading for many times where we are today, all will be foregiven.
Gary
I'll be thrilled if it happens sooner than I think, I just know that no company pays a major multiple of the current price to buy another company. If our TLD boosts the price above $10, then a buyout at $20 or more works. I've seen a lot of companies reveal TLD and I can't remember a company that went to over a $10 billion market cap on the strength of TLD alone.
Gary
I think all discussion of a buyout by Merck, or anyone else is very premature. We know that $20 billion is what LP indicated she'd consider, and if all works well, I think that's cheap, but no company pays more than double the current market cap, so even if they'd pay that, we need to be over $10 a share to be in that range.
A partnership, with an equity interest, is a different matter, and after TLD was revealed, if a partner stepped up and made an offer to buy in it could be at a substantial premium to the share price at that time. I believe TLD will get us above $1, how far above I don't know, but let's say we were in the $2 to $3 range. An offer for 30% of the company at $5 a share, half from newly issued shares, half from shareholders tindering their shares would bring a lot of money into the company, and effectively elevate the share price to $5.
This would position the company for $10 or more once drug approval is achieved, and then a buyout becomes a possibility for $20 billion or more. I don't believe that could occur this year, but approval next year is certainly in the cards, so anything could happen. Meanwhile, if the partnership occurred, the Phase 2 Trial for DCVax-Direct could be started with several sites, and by the time approval was under consideration for DCVax-L, preliminary results might be know, if they are, and if they're positive, $20 billion may not be an acceptable offer, in fact I'd question taking double that.
Gary
Thanks, I do know what they are, what I'm questioning is whether the companies calling units foggers are actually using electrostatic foggers, or if only foggers, so electrostatic foggers would be a cut above what they're using. I suspect that if someone was making a small portable electrostatic unit at a reasonable price they could sell a lot of them, it might not be intended for industrial use, but something for a home under a few hundred dollars could sell well.
Gary
Out of curiosity, when we talk about foggers, are they electrostatic, or something that falls between a sprayer, which essentially only gets to what you direct it at, and an electrostatic unit, where the spray/fog is attracted to distribute itself on all surfaces.
It would seem to me that a real fogger does reach most everywhere that's within the fog that's created, but it's better if electrostatic.
Please correct me if I'm wrong about this.
Gary
I do believe TLD has been moved a bit from the end of this month, early next the company estimated at the Annual Meeting. I do believe they'll announce a hard lock, but wouldn't be surprised at all to find that they're working on soft lock. If I'm right, by the time hard lock is called, they may not have that much more to do to incorporate the data they were missing with all the rest they gathered during a soft lock.
It's impossible to say just how much delay the problems are creating, perhaps it's no more than a few days, perhaps it's a few weeks. Perhaps we can better estimate where we are when we learn of the hard lock. Perhaps we'll learn more from guidance provided in the overdue 10-Q. I don't believe the data issues have anything to do with it being late, but it doesn't prevent the company from updating us when they issue it.
,
It's clear that we're closing in on when we'll get TLD, where we go from there will be dependent on what it says.
Gary
On the subject of losing money as a stock goes down, while it's true that your accounts value is diminished, but the only way you actually lose money is if you sell at the lower prices. I think we as investors need to look at the bigger picture of what's happening all over wrt the growth of PCTL in communities all over the U.S., the U.K. and now we're hearing about other countries in the world where our distributors have roots.
I suspect that 5 years from now you could travel to much of the world and find distributors who've purchased or leased PCTL equipment to produce HOCL for sanitizing throughout there community. I cannot say what PCTL's stock price will be at that time, or that it hasn't been bought out, but I believe it will be no less than 100 times what it is today.
No one likes down days in stocks, unless they're looking to purchase more, but we just need to look beyond them. Personally I wouldn't consider selling even one share before next year because I believe the gains by next year will have the share price at, or above $1. If I were wrong by 50%, it would still be ten times what it is today. Would anyone complain about that. The thing is, I could be equally wrong on the high side, over $2, not one, it will all be dependent on the earnings the company shows as we get greater results for each succeeding quarter.
Gary
Poor Man,
My belief is much more in what the scientists are doing than the management. From what I can tell, Dr. Liau is highly respected, largely responsible for the development of DCVax-L, and I believe she know it's effective, and has communicated that in her presentation, even if she cannot say precisely what the unblinded data will show.
The thing I believe is that, even if she cannot say with certainty that a given patient got the vaccine up front, or got the vaccine after time, or never got the vaccine, I believe she is nearly certain that very few, if none of the patients that are living today never received the vaccine. I believe as lead clinician she in a position to know, though
I certainly may be wrong about that.
I don't believe this has anything to do with an acquisition or potential partnership. I would suspect it has something to do with whatever the situation in Germany was, and a disagreement between the two as to how it was to be presented. I would suspect that our CEO wouldn't sign the report in the manner that the CEO wanted it to be issued as, so she made herself the CFO. I wouldn't be surprised if the 10-Q is out tomorrow, though it may take a little longer.
If there is one thing you can say about our CEO it's that she makes bold moves, whether they're welcomed by investors, or not. In the end, if she ultimately either achieves a market cap that's well into double digit billions, or a buyout for those sort of figures, she'll be toasted by investors for her skills. If she fails to achieve that, but reaches at least several billions for the market cap, she'll still receive more praise then criticism. Of course if we fail, she'll get all the blame, whether she truly deserves it, or not.
In reality, she has the most to gain in making the company a success, as she's got a ton of the stock. I don't believe she concerns herself at all with the daily price, or how the company is perceived as long as what she's doing is part of her game plan for success. Sure, dilution hurts the stock price, but if it funds things that she's sure need to be done, in the long run it will pay.
My ideal scenario would have a partner come in, for say 30% ownership in the company, bringing in billions for it and elevating the stock price to at least somewhere over $5. At that point, the partner would have essential control of the company, as it's essentially impossible to defeat a measure brought up for shareholder consideration by that partner. If the partner wished current management to step down, I believe they'd do it, and with billions to work with, bringing DCVax-Direct through trials, and conducting further trials with DCVax-L they could easily support these trials while approval and initial revenue for DCVax-L was just starting to happen. If the above came to pass, I don't believe it would be long before we saw the $20 billion market cap that LP wanted, but the good news is we wouldn't stop there.
Gary
I believe a soft lock would become a hard lock as soon as whatever data they were attempting to find was found. Thing is, if they made the determination to do it this way, the contractors could be working today getting everything together. When the missing information was found, it shouldn't take long to add it and put the entire report together. I would hope that's what they're doing, if so, we might just get TLD by early July in spite of the delay.
I wish I thought Covid-19 wouldn't play a role from here on out, but I suspect it will be a problem for some time. I've seen where in some States the numbers hospitalized is rising dramatically, and approaching their capacity.
I can't help but believe that with more people sick, working from home, zoom conferencing, it will have to slow the time to create a BLA, then for the FDA to evaluate it.
Gary
It's funny how our perspective changes with the movement of a decimal point. If I told you I purchased a stock for $7 and in less than 6 months it was $49 you'd say, what a great investment. But people think it's no big deal for a stock to go from $.007 to $.049 in the same period.
I agree with all who believe we'll go higher, hopefully beyond a dollar this year, but don't complain about going from $.007 on December 31st to $.049 now. The reason I'm citing those numbers is my first share in the company, and half my current holdings, were bought on December 31st for very slightly under $.007. Of course now I'd wish I bought more, but I still feel very comfortable with what I have.
I was at Cedars Sinai for a test today, while there I asked if Covid-19 hospitalizations were coming down, the person I asked wasn't an expert, but she said she believed they were. It will take a few weeks to see if that continues after the crowds protesting over the last weeks, but I do believe we still have it in reasonable control in California. From what I'm hearing, many states today are approaching their hospital capacities, so it's still a problem elsewhere, and could worsen if crowds have spread the disease. I hope I'm wrong, but I believe that over 200K deaths by August have become possible. I know the country needed to open up to some degree, but if we're not careful, we could push the deaths up to the over a million thought to be at the extreme highs some time ago. At Cedars, people are well protected from one another, you wear masks everywhere, seating is spaced out and few are in any room, in short, they're taking it very seriously. I cannot say how they're sanitizing, but I felt safe going there. I don't know that I'd feel safe in a lot of stores, or eating at a restaurant, even with spacing.
Gary
I know the product showed HOCL in it, but I don't know that PCTL is the supplier. I also note that they show alcohol as the active ingredient, I don't know how the two of these mix.
I suspect that with 2 oz per container, you'd need a whole lot of containers of this spray to sanitize anything of real significance. DE indicated a plan to sell HOCL through markets, etc and others no doubt are looking to do it as well, but I believe most will be selling the liquid for use in a sprayer, and ideally an electrostatic sprayer for complete coverage.
We've all seen the pictures of sanitizing an aircraft utilizing a portable electrostatic sprayer. Based on the size of the sprayer, I'd guess it held no more than a gallon, perhaps less HOCL, and that would do an aircraft. I suspect that people with fair sized businesses will be using gallons a week if they're sanitizing daily. It would be interesting to see how much is deemed to be necessary to handle say 1000 square feet of floor space.
Gary
I don't believe we're anywhere near that. If the SEC has questions about what's in the 10-Q they'll look into it, worst case the 10-Q will need to be revised. I really would love to see the SEC back off on all that's present in both quarterly and annual reports. With all sorts of information available on the net, I really question the need for warnings about the risks of investing in stock, or a replay about all the things which happened in the past. Why not have links provided to all these things to bring the volume of the report down to just financial accounting for the period being reported on, plus guidance about where the company is, and where it's going.
From a standpoint of how many Analysts look at the report, much depends if companies meet, beat, or miss the Analysts consensus estimates of earnings. In the case of some Analysts, you could say that you cured a specific form of cancer, but missed on earnings, and all they'd talk about is missing on earnings. It's sad, but earnings are greatly overemphasized for companies that don't yet have products for sale.
Gary
Those were my thoughts as well, I don't know if it had to do with the German problem, or something else in the 10-Q, but this eliminates a disagreement between the CEO and CFO, so I would expect the 10-Q very shortly. I wonder if this creates a red flag where the SEC may want to speak to the former CFO.
L.P. is an attorney, she may come close to violating the law, but I suspect she can justify her position and while it may be shady, it's not illegal. Clearly the former CFO may not have agreed.
Gary
When people discuss stocks price they sometimes ignore the shares outstanding, market cap is a much better comparison. I don't know precisely where we'll be once warrants are converted, but I know we're closing in on a billion shares outstanding, therefore each dollar in share price represents nearly $1 billion in market cap.
Don't get me wrong, if our vaccines work in multiple cancers a market cap that reaches triple digit billions is possible, it won't happen overnight, but if the company trades independently, it's possible. For now, I believe we'll need to be near approval to take on a double digit market cap.
Gary
Out of curiosity, if you put it on the shelf in a market, how long will the shelf life be, and once opened, how quickly should it be used. I'm of the belief that these times are relatively short.
I know the product you get from a home generator may not be of the same quality, it needs to be tested and brought to the proper Ph, but if not used shortly, just dump it, add new water and salt and make a new batch.
If the product is somehow stabilized, that would change the picture completely, I hope that's the case.
Gary
When I hear stories like AMC won't stay in business, or a restaurant owned by a friend won't ever reopen I really wonder what the owners of the properties are going to do.
I think it would be far better off if the Govt. banks holding the mortgages, owners, and leaser could all get together and figure out a way for all to stay in business. Clearly with no money coming in, people who lease can't pay the rent, ultimately owners can't pay the mortgage, then banks force foreclosures, finally the banks don't have the needed reserves.
It takes far more help than what the Govt. put in, because much of that went to corporations who knew how to get it, rather than smaller business who needed it. I believe what's needed is some relief from the Govt. that permits owners and tenants to work out what is possible to do while rebuilding business. Lower rents, mortgage payments, etc through the period where if businesses are allowed to open, they must reduce seating, so revenue is lowered needs to be something acceptable to all without a hit to anyone's credit. Eventually as the Covid-19 is no longer a threat, as people feel that there is no risk to having dinner in a crowded restaurant, or attending a movie with most seats filled, and eat the popcorn, etc, don't wear a mask, then the payments can move back to where they were. For now, such measures would keep everyone in business.
The same sort of thing has to occur in homes or apartments where people have lost their jobs, once again such actions ultimately prevents the foreclosures that kill the economy, as it was in 2008. It will require negotiations, Federal support, but if people work it out, a real depression can be avoided, if not, that's where we're almost certainly headed. Federal authorities need to get funds to those who truly need it, not to the corporations that have the skills to prepare the documentation, while sitting on billions of dollars in the bank.
Gary
I believe that we'll certainly see gains when the 10-K and 10-Q are behind us, but the really big news will be when we see the 10-Q's for the second and third quarters. If they came on time, we'd be looking at early August, and early November, hopefully they will be on time, but we know they can always ask, and get at least a 15 day delay authorized. If Covid-19 still increases when things can be done you might add a month or more.
I hate to say it, but I believe the protesting, which I believe has a valid cause, will also result in spikes up on the Covid-19 curves. While many did wear masks, social distancing certainly wasn't maintained, so some increase in numbers should be seen, hopefully it won't be too high.
Perhaps the pandemic was in part responsible for the crowd size as people were getting tired of staying indoors, and with so many not working, they had the time to join in. Hopefully it will result in societal change, but it will be years before we know it had a lasting message.
If I were looking to make a change in how policing was done, I'd simply rule that if the camera is off, whatever allegations are made are to be assumed to be true. If cameras are left on, they'll at least give a perspective as to what happened. IMHO cameras off are an indication an officer is doing something that others shouldn't see. Today we live in a world where others cameras are on, so turning off a camera may not hide what's happening at all, and nothing looks worse than proof that the police are lying.
Gary
I didn't hear about this company until the trial was nearly a decade old, but from the first I looked at it, it was clear that they were looking at improved survival as the means to an approval. Clearly that wasn't the plan when the trial was initiated, but they could see people living far longer than anticipated, and O/S became the goal.
I suspect that when you see the curves for the first 50% of the patients you may not see a dramatic improvement, and that may indicate why stopping the trial earlier wouldn't give them what was needed to gain approval. As the trial went on, a certain percentage just continued to live, and now that we're practically at data lock, nearly 5 years after the last patient entered the trial, lots of people are still alive.
Statistically with practically all patients at 5 years or beyond, with the SOC it's doubtful more than 10 to 15 would have been expected to be alive. I believe that we'll have four or more times that number, perhaps nearly 80 still alive, but that may be optimistic, if it's 60 we're still over four times what would have been expected with the SOC.
I really don't care about all the consideration of what they experienced in the past, I don't believe that approval in the future can be denied with as many survivors as will be seen in the results. If the trial were designed today, it would be an entirely different animal, but it's not, it's what was developed well over a decade ago, and much has been learned since then.
Gary
Right now, better than 99% of the investment public have never heard of HOCL, let alone PCTL. Perhaps there is a greater awareness about HOCL by those involved in sanitizing things, but still the majority look at products like Lysol, Clorox and Purel rather than a product that's much more natural, but has no name brand recognition.
I believe it's clear that when you see companies using electrostatic sprayers to sanitize, they've discovered HOCL, but again, they don't say what they're sanitizing with, and once again there is no name brand product that's nationally recognized. We frankly have no idea how many of these people are purchasing HOCL made by PCTL, or by others.
To put it another way, we're flying under the radar. Applications of HOCL are growing dramatically, but people doing it aren't advertising, we're protecting this hospital with HOCL, or we're sanitizing this restaurant, gym, etc with it. People are saying, our facilities are being sanitized routinely to protect all customers and employees.
This won't continue forever, but it's also doubtful if a brand named HOCL product will be found in every market, mainly because of shelf life issues. Markets don't want to stock something that can't be stored for months, or even years and still be effective. People will become aware of it, and they'll either purchase from direct suppliers who have fresh product routinely, or they'll purchase small producers, and just use salt and water to make it themselves. Right now such units are available on Amazon, though it takes substantial time to get most of them. I suspect as awareness grows, you'll find them is small appliances in all sorts of stores, right in with toasters, coffeemakers, etc. The likes of the major products like Lysol and Clorox may try to say our product is stronger, easier to use, better in some way, but in just a few years, many people will be using such devices. At that time, we'll no longer be flying under the radar.
I believe that one to two years from now if you mentioned you purchased PCTL back in 2020 people will immediately know that you've had the sort of gains that buying companies like Tesla, Facebook, Amazon, etc in it's infancy have brought those investors.
Gary
I'm glad that someone pointed out that DCVax-Direct is essentially the second generation of the DCVax's. I hope it won't be long before we see it further along in the clinic. To my way of thinking, treatment with both makes sense. First you use the Direct prior to surgery, and give it sufficient time to reach any mets that have formed. Then you remove the operable tumor, creating L for use post surgery. The L can be used until it's exhausted. If further tumor activity occurs, you again initiate treatment with DCVax-Direct that's been freshly made so it reflects any change in the cancer.
Certainly other drugs found effective are used simultaneously, no one is saying this is completely stand alone treatment. It's hard to say that in some people, or for certain cancers it could be the only treatment necessary, it will take many years to know.
Gary
I think we might all be surprised by the number of Analysts following the stock, but saying nothing as officially they don't follow penny stocks. When the data comes out, and the price moves up, watch them come out of the woodwork.
Hopefully once the TLD is presented the company will webcast a quarterly conference, where Analysts are permitted to ask questions, I think you'll be surprised how many different Analysts are chiming in.
Of course that's only possible if the company opens the door to such questions. We'll see if they do. It's something that's quite common with other larger biotechs.
Gary
A question that could be interesting is, with all they've learned in the over a decade in the trial, would Dr. Liau make any changes in the vaccines if she were developing them today. I would suspect that like most other products, by the time they're approved something better is in the lab. The questions are, is it sufficiently better to warrant the cost, and from NWBO's standpoint, do they have an arrangement with Dr. Liau to at least have first right to work with her in further developments of these products.
As long as the patents exist, any improvements built on them would certainly result in payments to NWBO, so even if they weren't the ones developing a second generation product, they should see some income from them.
Gary
We did Costco yesterday, they were rigorously enforcing wearing masks and distancing where possible. Occasionally you'd pass close to someone to get where you're going, but people weren't hovering together. They have plexiglass up around the cashiers, etc to keep people safe.
It's sad that many are not taking this seriously, and as you said, it will increase the number of deaths. I'm hoping that in two months or so PSTI will reveal that PLX-PAD is effective in pneumonia, I believe they'll be able to save a lot of lives if approved this fall. Results in compassionate use have been excellent in small numbers to date, but clinical trial should begin any days, it shouldn't take long to fill and evaluate.
I really do believe that two weeks from now we'll be speaking of hundreds of thousands who protested having the disease, I hope I'm wrong. I believe the protests, which may have long term social benefits, were huge because so many people were living at home, many unemployed, so they had the time to get involved. Had we been living in normal times, there would have been protests, but no where near the size of what has materialized because of current conditions.
I look forward to hearing more from you, especially when your business actually gets underway. I believe you'll be very successful.
Gary
I believe the societal change coming out of the protests will be a good thing long term, but short term, I believe that Covid-19 infections are going to grow dramatically, and hopefully they'll not exceed hospital capacity, but nothing is certain.
The question is, will we accept the greater deaths that continuing to open the country will bring, or do they shut it down again. I tend to believe that we've grown to accept the deaths, and keeping the country opening up will continue, even if the totals go to a quarter million or more passing on.
Yesterday was the first day I've been out extensively and it's the first time I've worn a mask for a long duration, frankly it's uncomfortable. Thing is, it's better than increasing the likelihood of getting the disease, and it's something we all need to tolerate. I wish I could think of a better way to deal with this, but I cannot think of one.
How does PCTL relate to this. Frankly, it keeps the pressure on all sorts of businesses to sanitize as they reopen, so it's a positive for PCTL. I suspect that HOCL would be great for sanitizing our cloth masks quickly, if it were readily available to do so.
I know the advice is, wash cloth masks every day, I doubt over one in ten will do it. A quick spritz with HOCL would probably be equally effective from a germ killing basis, but if it's dirty, it won't clean it.
I suspect it will be a few years before we're able to move around without masks, etc. Even when that's that's the case, I suspect that our sanitation practices will still be stressed, and just a normal practice compared to where we were before Covid-19. PCTL in a few years could very well be a company that most people are familiar with, whereas today I doubt if one in one thousand has ever heard of it.
Gary
As I understand it, money permitted in your Roth is already taxed, you're not taxed on gains in the Roth. I believe you can trade in the Roth and nothing you do is taxable, I hope to accumulate more shares just selling when I believe the company will retrench after a significant gain, and purchasing additional shares if I'm right. Of course if I'm wrong I'll have fewer shares, but stocks rarely don't retrace some after a major move.
Gary
I would hope that on Monday before the bell the quarterly is filed, I do believe it's holding down the share price, even though what's in it is largely insignificant. Of course when it's filed there are so called Analysts that will judge the company based on one thing only, did they meet, beat, or miss the consensus estimates of earnings.
While I believe most biotech investors aren't concerned with earnings until a company actually is selling an approved products, many biotech Analysts know nothing about the company they're analyzing, they only know what the financials show. Clearly our financials show a company that's diluting to pay the bills.
I don't believe we'll be badly punished by whatever the financial show, though if we missed consensus the Analysts will make it sound bad. My point is that once it's filed, it removes a cloud hanging over the company, and while we know that TDL is likely delayed, it's only a matter of a few weeks more. We're rapidly gaining on the day when we'll learn a great deal about a trial that's gone on for over a decade, and which all discussions of have been very positive. There may be shorts who can find flaws in TLD that create seeds of doubt, but I believe most investors will like what they see when it's finally revealed.
I'm still of the belief that we'll be at least $.50, and perhaps substantially higher before we see TLD. Once we see it, I certainly believe $1 or more is in the cards, but should we get some highly positive press, no telling how high it may go. I really don't believe over a few dollars can be sustained unless we either gain a partner, or until approval is anticipated. I generally don't trade, but certainly would consider some trading of shares in my Roth IRA is the price goes above what I believe to be sustainable.
Gary
I didn't believe the MM's could maintain a short for a year or more, but I saw it happen with the Russell situation. Someone had told me that the MM's could move the short position around to other MM's, but they may have been wrong about that.
I know MM's function is to stabilize markets with shorting themselves to fill a demand, then purchasing share where they have no immediate buyer, but I thought their were limitations on how long they could maintain such a position, I suspect the SEC doesn't watch them that closely.
I much prefer the days when people only invested in companies with the belief that they'd go up, I also preferred it when spreads were not hundreths of a cent with computer trading programs that play games with trading for tiny fractions of a cent. I believe a tiny tax on every trade might dramatically lower the amount of programmed trading as they'd need to gain more than a few hundredths of a cent to make it work.
Gary
When companies are added to the Russells the MM's either accumulate or go short the share that Institutions need who must hold shares. Essentially all those shares are pushed to the Institutions at current prices after hours the day of the Russell rebalancing. It's interesting to watch the after hours trading that day, as millions of shares cross, but I makes little difference in the share price.
In at least one case, I saw a short position established when the company went on the Russell, and it was maintained until the company came off it. Essentially a MM or number of them had created millions of shares, and they closed the short position a year later. It shouldn't be legal, but anyone looking at the short positions could determine that was what they were doing.
Gary
I agree that if they provide numbers they should be conservative, but that's better than no numbers at all. Clearly the Street dosen't get excited about very positive sounding releases that don't estimate their worth.
It may not be possible to say how much revenue a distributor will bring in with any precision, but a conservative ballpark estimate could be made. I always prefer the reality being better than the estimates, but it will be awhile before the reality numbers will be known.
I would suspect that most distributors will be worth more to the co mpany next year, over this one, and even more in the following year as I believe they're working in an area that's greatly expanding, at least in terms of the demand for the products that PCTL distributors can provide.
I think what DE contributes comes largely from what distributors are facing. I believe it's become quite clear that electrostatic sprayers are in high demand, and currently demands are not being met. They will be in the future. Right now a distributor who provides sanitizing services themselves may service a lot of companies who will eventually purchase sprayers, then buy the fluid from our distributors. While PCTL isn't manufacturing the portable electrostatic sprayers, I would suspect that our distributors all have sources for electrostatic sprayers of their own. It would be nice to see PCTL making one, or at least importing it, with their name brand on it.
It's funny how quickly shortages occur. With the covid-19 outbreak, we're looking to go to markets less, so we thought about adding a small freezer in the garage. There has apparently already been a run on them, we may still do it, but right now they're not available anywhere, and I really don't want to order something that won't be delivered until July..
Gary