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.
Chris, Dr Venkateswarlu Kondragunta (eyecolor) was listed listed as one of the founders of Dnaprint Genomics on their old website. I saw it, you saw it, and everybody else saw it. It has been discussed either here or on RB as to how one of the company founders could become so disatisfied with the present situation and outcome of events. I'm not trying to vouch for Dr. K's credability, just trying to set the record straight. You are perfectly free to look at the facts differently if you want to but, to me, facts are facts. Mix facts with dreams, hopes, optimism or whatever and go forward. But never ignore the facts. Good luck.
Iom
Chris, correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that guy is one of the founders of Dnaprint, is he not?
Frog,
You said:
It's doubtful that a company with any concept of fiscal responsibility would squander a potentially valuable option on the possibility that a patent 'might' be awarded in a few YEARS. So even if they liked the concepts in the patent application and coveted the technology therein, why would they allow their option 'window' to commence on such a tenuous promise? Why wouldn't they demand the actual patent award to start the clock?
Excellent anology for why no large pharma, small pharma, or any pharma for that matter has come forward and offered any kind of a deal with Dnap. It all looks very promising but Orchid (or Beckman Colter) holds all the cards. Until that matter is resolved it is still just a waiting game. And we may, as you said, be waiting years. How many is anyones guess.
For now, we'll just have to settle for high profile forensics cases. Pretty exciting but far from wildly profitable.
Iom
GE, my prayers are with you. I went through a similer situation myself in a work related injury (oilfield). Ended up with 2 skull plates and a cervical fusion. Two years later I was back to doing the same type work. I had a family to support. I'm proof positive of the power of the human spirit, family, and youthful strength.
Merry Christmas and good luck.
Iom
Some on this board seem to think, or want others to think, that I am posting as somebody other than who I say I am. To me this borders on the hilarious. If you do a little research you will find that I have been posting under this alias for at least 4 years, maybe longer. I can't remember exactly and it's not important. I've never posted anywhere as anyone else. If I ever do, I will make that fact known, period.
What I really want to do is thank those posters who have come to my defense. It's encouraging to know that there are at least a few posters posting and reading here who believe that one has to consider the negatives on balance with the positives. Sometimes the balance shifts strongly in one direction or the other and right now, in my opionion, it is shifting strongly toward the negative. I'm not going to expand on that because anyone who has been paying attention knows what all the negatives are and I don't want to be accused of beating a dead horse. Actually, that horse isn't dead (I wish he were), he's alive and well. He's just waiting for news on what the financing deal with La Jolla Cove Investors is all about and, being rested and fresh, he'll be ready to run again.
It's no secret that these message boards are read by more than than those who post and investors that lurk. They are also read by company officials who (hopefully) are interested in learning about the thoughts and opinions of small investors who own shares and those who, for whatever reason, don't but are interested but apprehensive. Since we don't appear to have an investors relations at Dnap at this time, or at least one that will take calls, I would say that this connection is vital for continued communication with whoever. If everyone were to keep the blinders on and ignore the negatives and continuously expound on the positives, or what might be perceived as the positives, it would be a waste of time for anyone but the most optimistic and selfdeceptive to read what is posted.
That's enough for now, I'm starved and it's time to eat.
Iom
IVRT, it's all in fun. I truly respect your intention to keep personal attacks from this board and appreciate it greatly. At the time I responded to Gcbr's post to me, it hadn't been deleted and I took it as a personal insult and responded back as civily as possible. I see now that post has been deleted (Arch's). That sounds fair to me.
Iom
Theo, it would be a good thing if that is what Tony used the funds for but I don't know that it is. Do you? Besides, the form 4's weren't the only reason I posted the link. In fact they hadn't even occured to me untill after the post.
Iom
Arch, are these facts current enough for you?
http://www.nasdaq.com/asp/quotes_sec.asp?mode=&kind=&symbol=dnap&symbol=&symbol=&...
Or don't you bother with facts that are signed off and authorized by Dnap company executives. Don't bother to answer that. I know what kind of "facts" you like.
Ming, I stand by what I said which, in a nutshell, was that all points of a negative nature brought to light by me or anyone else are listed in the SEC filings. You and w2p, amoung others, have done an admirable job of pointing out and providing links to the items of a positive nature. If everyone were to read only the positive and ignore the negative we would now be at astronomical prices levels without any fundamental support. If that were to happen, when all the chickens came home to roost and unconsidered negatives were actually realised, (and I'm not saying that they ever will) the resulting fall would also be astronomical.
I have great faith in Tony Frudakis's skills and abilities as a scientist and researcher, even though I have never met him. I know this from reading about his accomplishments.
I also know from reading his newsletters he is a great salesman and did a great job of selling me on the company three years ago when I first read the investment package sent to me by the company. This is neither good nor bad. Just keep in mind that a salesman seldom points out negatives to what he is selling and no one should expect him to, that's not his job. And since we haven't been living in caves all our lives and have actually been out in the real world experiencing real world experiences we are all aware of that aren't we? But sometimes, in our haste to realise our dreams and ambitions, we overlook those knowledges and experiences that should keep us from acting merely on exuberance and excitment, and do stupid things. And I've done my share.
And speaking of biased opinons and agendas, it has been my observation that you and w2p (amoung others) usually react with sometimes rabid fervur and ridicule to anything and anyone who posts in a negative manner. I am not alone in this observation, as it has been pointed out by others whom I will not name at this time.
Again, I'll ask you, are you willing to repost the positive aspects of this company I have pointed out in the past?
With all that said, I am done with this discussion as I can see it serves no usefull purpose at this time to continue. You have your thoughts on the matter and I have mine. Differences of opinion plain and simple. Agendas I don't know about and some that seem apparent one day seem obscure the next which seems to, in turn, obscure the point of discussion.
I have much to do and so little time to do it.
Iom
Ming, again, against my better judgment and desire to remain a seemingly disinterested lurking bystander, I must respond by saying that I am deeply flattered by your tracking and filing away for later use all the posts of a negative nature posted by me in recent history. Thank you for being so thoughtfull. I just hope you won't disappoint me by failing to file away and, in turn, reposting all of the positive posts I posted in my prior life as a nonthinking follower of the dream propagated by so many posting here and on RB.
Btw, can you prove that all of the possibilities related by me in the posts you reposted are not possible? If you cannot, then why repost them? If it was to simply remind me and all others of the very real negative possibilities in relation to our company then I say "good job, you did well".
I really do not intend any animosity toward you or any other poster here or on RB. I simply feel very strongly that all sides to an argument must be viewed as openly as possible in order to maintain an honest forum. You might call it FUD. I call it being honest with myself and others. Some may choose to disregard what is said and act in a manner contrary to what is said, but that is their perogative. After all, this is still a free country.
Iom
Ming, against my better judgment and tendancies to avoid conficting situations, I must say this. It sounds very impressive on paper and could very well be true to the letter and I'm not saying it isn't as I am not qualified to do so and have never pretended to be, but I do know this. Untill the patents mentioned are granted and successfully defended in courts of law it is practically meaningless to say that Dnap has a monopoly on the science involved in the patents. The processes required for the affirmation of the science and related patents will take many years, a lot of patience, and a lot frustration. Some of which we have just started to experience. And if the FDA doesn't play along, it will all be for naught.
Nonetheless, thank you for the very informative post.
Iom
Ok Arch, who do you think I am? Would the real itsonlymuni please stand up, lol. Talk about not having a clue, that's you.
Iom
Billycal, you're right, none of us can speak of deals, associations, contacts, point people...because there haven't been any. There, as of yet, has been no evidence that Gabriel has done anything at all. Do you know something that hasn't been made public yet?
How hard is it to get on the phone and call Athena Capital Partners and ask them to seek financing through a PP. The receptionist could have done it! The actual work was done by Athena not by anyone at Dnap. And by the looks of the financing, there was no PP so even Athena couldn't get the job done.
And the deal with La Jolla calls for 400,000 dollar incremental payments paid at their discretion or Dnap's discretion. It could be the whole 8 million or it could be no where near that depending on the success or failure of the company. I personally hope it is the former. That would be much more to my liking
W2p, itsonlymuni is the only alias I have ever posted under on this or any other message board. Why do you ask me that question any way? We have bantered back and forth before here and on RB, sometimes in agreement, sometimes not. When we were in agreement you never doubted the sincerity of my alias. Why now? What do think my alternate alias might be? That should be good for a good laugh, at least for me anyway.
Iom
w2p, ok, I'll concede that it probably isn't a vacation anyone would pay for but that's not the issue. The real issue is that it is a business trip and Tony is a scientist not a business man. He and his high paid executives need to get more on track as to who should be handling business matters and who should be handling the scientific research that has to be done to ever be successfull in this field.
Would it make more sense if Gabriel or one of the other excetutives went to these conferences and Tony stayed home and continued to work on research? You bet it would. If Tony doesn't trust them to adequately represent the interests of the company and the science it stands for, why are they even there? They are the people who supposedly will be getting the company the deals and contracts it needs to survive. Wouldn't it make more sense that they be out making contacts and getting personal recognition as company representatives? Much more so than the chief scientist.
Doesn't anyone else find it just a little irritating that Gabriel and his girlfriend have done nothing as yet with regards to running the company? There has been no evidence thus far that they have except the last 10q looked a little more professional. But was that worth what they're being paid? I don't think so. And don't tell me that they were responsible for the latest round of financing because if you are impressed with that, then you're easily impressed. Jmho.
Imo
Stak, staying in Sarasota and working on the completion of projects (Retinome, Statnome and Ovanome) that we were initialy told would be completed by now, hardly constitutes lab chores.
When you look at what Tony first spoke of and where we are at today you have to conclude that we have made very little progress in achieving those promised ends. They keep getting postponed a little further down the road all the time. If you want to try to read between the lines and see unspoken of potential, that's fine, we all know it's there, but I'm afraid I'm a show me don't just tell kind of guy. Growth in revenues is what I want to see and I've seen very little of that since Ancestry was first launched.
Iom
Anybody besides me think the company would better served if Tony stayed home in the lab and did research rather than touring the globe hitting all these forensics conferences? It may look impressive to see his name as speaker at a conference a half world away but I fail to see how that will ever add to the bottom line. Just an added expense and Tony gets a paid vacation on us. If we were an established company with a firm grip on a market niche with many devoted customers firmly emplaced it would make sense to try to branch out internationaly by attending international conferences to get the word out. But not at this point when we are struggling towards respectable revenues and accepting dubious financing. Jmho.
Iom
66fan, thanks, do you live in the area? Were they quite busy and was Zack also still present? How about the Indian scientists, any of them still there? Did you get a count on the total employees. Tia.
Sorry Ming, but that answer isn't good enough. Have you walked into Dnaprint's lab and found him hard at work? Who did you get that answer from? And why could you get that answer and not me? Did you just assume it since nobody has said anything to the contrary? Their new website certainly doesn't supply it and is ominously vague about many things. The old website gave a much more detailed description and much was eliminated from the new one. Why did that happen? Legal reasons? It seems there are so many open questions that demand answers and these are just a few.
Iom
Mingwan0, that post is dated November of last year. Do you know if Matt Thomas is still at Dnaprint? I don't and this is the answer I received to that and other questions some time ago from Dnap investor relations.
Hello xxxxxxxx, I am sorry I have not returned your last call. As you can imagine, we had several and I have been going through them over the last week and working through getting back to them. I have in the past spoken with you and believe that I have called you back or emailed you with answers to your previous questions. If you feel you still have outstanding questions that need answers, feel free to let me know and I will do what I can to answer them.
As for the questions below, yes investor relations is working, we have been busy working on updating the website and getting information posted on there which will hopefully answer most of your questions and concerns. We do not comment on company operations or personnel but the website has the most updated information on staff within the company. You can also look on the website under Services/Products, where you will find a description of the Company's Forensic products, including RETINOME and DNAWITNESS.
thank you for contacting Investor Relations and have a great day.
Appreciatively,
Investor Relations
Investor Relations
DNAPrint Genomics, Inc.
941-366-3400
dnap@dnaprint.com
----- Original Message -----
From: xxxxx xxxxxxx
To: dnap@dnaprint.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 11:01 PM
Dear Investor Relations,
I have made phone calls to Dnaprint and have been directed to investor relations for answers to my questions. However, I always received a recorded message, left my name email address and phone number but have never received an answer.
Does Dnap still have an investor relations department? The last 10Q stated that Dnaprints present full time employee count stood at 7. A CEO, CFO, CMO, CSO, receptionist, and investor relations person leaves just one person to handle and process Dna Ancestry and Dna Witness orders. Is Dnaprint still receiving orders for these products or has demand dropped off to the extent that there is no processing of orders required?
Are the Indian scientists still working for Dnap? If they are no longer with the company, who is working to further develop Ancestry, Witness, Statnome and Ovinome? Has Dnap discontinued development of these products in favor of pursuing the development of drugs?
These questions are of utmost importance to me as a Dnaprint shareholder and answers would be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely yours,
xxxxx xxxxxxx
DougS, the last 10Q says they have seven employees and doesn't count the executives. The job duties of those employees isn't stated.
From the 10Q:
Staffing
We do plan to increase our work force as operations and cash flow warrant. Currently, we have seven full-time employees and our executive staff of four. As sales and investment warrant, we plan to add personnel in the sales and marketing, scientific, accounting, and administrative and investor relations areas
Maybe it's just semantics but that's the way I read it. And yes, the lack of cash could be a formidable problem. It's all a matter of wait and see.
Iom
I exempted Matt Thomas because there is no mention of him on Dnaprint's present website. I am unsure of his contribution to Dnap at this time. Have I missed something? I may have.
Iom
On reading of the development of Ancestry 2.0 into 2.5 and 3.0 I can't help but wonder who is performing all of this development work? The Indian scientists appear to be gone and Tony has been busy with bio conferences both here and abroad. There seems to be an obvious disconnect with reality here. Who is performing all the work? It is all so impressive on the face but it seems insurmountable for a seven employee company with only one very busy scientist (Tony) to accomplish all that is hoped for. I guess I just don't get it.
Iom
mingwan0, sorry but I copied and pasted the wrong post. This is the one I was referring to.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=1832872
Was on my lunch hour, in kind of a hurry and didn't preveiw. My mistake.
Iom
NikLinna, you appear to be using the same logic as employed in this post:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=1833361
Lol. Have a good one,
Iom
w2p & Bag8ger, I didn't see the evidence on senecio's website but I've been following the hype that it created. And I don't doubt that it occured. But I have to give credence to Bag's recieved email of the company's denial of a connection between the two companies. Has anybody had success in contacting Dnaphenomics. It is my understanding that they too say there is no connection.
It would be quite simple for another company to gain access to a description of Adimixmap's function and copy it for their own purposes. It's fairly common knowledge.
http://www.lshtm.ac.uk/eu/genetics/admix.html#desc
Admixmap appears to have been originated by Mark Shriver and others at Penn State and he may have connections with Dnaphenomics. He may be acting as a consultant for them just as he does with Dnaprint. Playing both ends to the middle so to speak.
And last but not least, the whole thing could simply be the result of sloppy housekeeping on senecio's part, something they were very quick to clean up. All in all, Dnaprints response to bag8ger is the most concrete and anything else is simply speculation. Have they ever falsely denied something before? I don't recall that they have.
Have fun
w2p, don't you trust/believe bag8ger?
I think your right. There were probably numeruous buy orders set at the 200dma and when it reached that point they all went through and spured a little rally. More than likely nothing more than that. We may bounce along the top of the 200dma for awhile before heading lower...or maybe not...we may go right through like it isn't even there. We'll just have to patiently wait and see.
firefight4, it sounds like it is available only to holders of a large number of shares, millions, the way it sounds. Looks like just another bitter pill to swallow if you want to stay long. As always, more shares equals dilution now or later no matter how they are derived. Demand will be our only savior. If that demand can be created in a realistic way, we can look for reward. If not, the damage will be slow, painfull, and steady. Proceed at your own risk.
firefight4,
See post 272220 on the RB board for the best summary. The poster, rysiekny, was initialy abmonished for it until others came to his/her defense. I believe it was the honorable thing to do and was greatly appreciated by me and many others I'm sure.
Have a good one
Miss Scarlet, there have been many beginings in the time I have been in this stock. The first one was the deal with TBF, which was a bitter pill to swallow but a begining just the same. Then came the deal with Orchid. On the face of it, that one appeared to be "the one" that would sweep us to success but, in reality, has been a thorn in our side of unknown magnitude. After that came the Malaysian grant money going to Dnapro, of which we owned 49%, that would carry us over the top. Where did that go? Then there was Gmed, the introduction of Ancestry, CMIH, Genelink, and very importantly, the LA murder case exposure. Interspersed in there somewhere were deals with various unversities and colleges, some of which have been obviously beneficial and some just so so. And it wouldn't be right if I didn't mention the 1.5 billion in newly authorized shares which made possible the hiring of our new Ceo, Cfo & Cmo all of which are going to present us with mega deals any day now. I know I've missed something, but you get the picture
The point I'm trying to make here is that each one of the aforementioned events have in the past been hyped and pumped to the allowable limit, if there is one, and we are still not too far from the starting gate. We still have no real revenues, and are still almost totaly dependant on the regular issuance of new shares to fund our operations. The Nij grant is just one more tiny baby step of dozens or perhaps hundreds more that our little baby company will have to take if it ever wants to grow up to fortune 500 status. And as we all know, some of those steps have been and might possibly be again into something not too pleasant and usually found in barnyards.
I also have to say, that while we have qualified for government grant money, which offers further validation to our existence, not to get to excited about an affiliation with an entity that moves as slowy as molasses in January and has it's own credibility problems.
Please don't take offence at my response to your post as it is directed, not just at you, but to all others who in the past tried to play up events that simply don't warrant the kind of eloquent hoopla they receive. As always this is Jmo and based on personal observation and facts.
Chris, if you call a message board that allows thoughts and opinions on all facets of the issues of interest then RB is a zoo. I've always liked zoos, especially ones that have a variety of different animals, even some like you. So enjoy the zoo, chris, because a good zoo is never boring.
Best of luck to ya,
Iom
angelfund,
If major deals are not announced within the next 3 to 6 months, then I would seriously question (putting it mildly) not only the appointments of the execs., but Dr. T's bonus as well. Let's hope the 105,000,000 shares granted (and partially vested) in Q2 will seem like a drop in the bucket when all is said and done.
You said a mouthful there. The jury's still out on whether those share are restricted or not. If not, when all those shares hit the float, and if nobody's buying, .0135 will look good. Jmho as always.
Best of luck,
Iom
Commando, you overlooked the rest of the paragraph.
"During both of the periods ended June 30, 2003 and 2002, the largest component
of our operating expenses was research and development, which consists primarily
of laboratory supplies, equipment rental, facilities and employment-related
costs. These costs increased from $1,099,382 in June 2002 to $2,126,803 in June
2003. The increase of $1,027,421 resulted primarily from the stock based
compensation received by our chief scientific officer in return for his services
to us."
This suggests Tony is the only one working on R&D. Or that, since Tony is now CSO, his salary is charged to R&D expense. Which makes the increase not impressive at all. Just a shifting around of expenses from admin (not good to increase) to R&D (better to increase).
Iom
W2p, Philipabel said his son is a biochemist for a large phmaceutical company. Taking that statment strictly in context tells me that he doesn't set company policy, doesn't make decisions concerning company ethics and more than likely has the position equivalent to a fly on the wall or a mouse in the corner observing the actions of those that do. Philipabel pointed out things that are well known to some, unknown to others and suspected by many. Facts, right or wrong, are still facts and I'm not saying that I agree with the outcome, immoral or otherwise.
I compliment you on your need to see change in the way big pharma dominates the drug industry. It will be very interesting to see how they deal with the growing stength of the little guys.
Best of luck,
Iom
Spook, thanks for adding some balance to an otherwise one sided disussion. W2p's response to Phil seemed niave and immature and, at the very least, out of line. Philipabel presented arguments that should be of absolute concern to any investor. W2p went after him like he had personaly insulted him (w2p) or his family. Perhaps W2p has become a little too enamored with this stock.
Best of luck,
Iom