Elk - You have no clue as to what you are talking about. You are comparing apples to rocket ships. Go back and do some research on Angelina Jolie. She VOLUNTARILY submitted herself to the double mastectomy WITHOUT considering any other options. Were other options (treatments or possible cures) available to her for her symptoms, I don’t know - that question needs to be asked of a medical professional, but she apparently was unwilling to consider ANY other option than the one she chose; hence, your genius conclusion that she had NO other options. Neither you, nor I, know what specific treatments or CURES PRED has to offer a patient at this point. Give it time and we will all be enlightened.

Care to elaborate?

Good evening Brian,

I am not sure that I understand your post. In post 23578, I was being facetious when I reminded St. George that the test kit was called “ARTguide” and not FARTguide”

They will show you when they release the next 10-Q report around February 15th. Obviously, you “accidentally” misnamed the product. It’s call “ARTguide”.

Make the broker give you part of the fee that they charge the short seller to borrow your shares.

Correction - The shorts are NOT getting my shares anytime soon”. Sorry for the typo.

The question is “Who is going to sell shares to the shorts so they can cover?” They are getting mine anytime soon I assure you.

Good evening waitin2retire,

The date for the annual shareholder meeting has not been set yet.

Hilarious. Thanks for the laugh!

You are correct sir. And the 3,000,000 new shares that were issued, came into existence as a result of employee stock options being exercised. So obviously, they have faith in the company’s future. What better long-term comfort could there be than an employee investing their money into the stock of the company that they work at?

Trust me, I am well aware of their backgrounds. Those guys have raised BILLIONS during their respective years and are capable of doing the same for PRED in due time. The $ 3 million and $ 5.4 million you reference in your post are “peanuts” relative to those gentlemen’s money raising capabilities. You don’t bring in the big artillery when a rifle will do. Those guys are working on MUCH, MUCH bigger financing deals on behalf of PRED.

Snow,

Look at the great strides that have been made in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer over the last 20 years. What was once thought to be a 100% incurable disease now has a high cure rate. It’s call “research and development” and PRED has done a lot of it relative to the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis, with more great advances on the horizon.

I have not heard THE COMPANY make ANY claims (as of yet) as to the ability of any of their products to cure endometriosis. Any claim of such ability by anyone other than THE COMPANY should be considered 100% speculation and should be taken with a grain of salt. Let’s just wait and see what the future holds.

Elk -

Your comments are based on what you “think” you know. What product/service does PRED have that you, or I, might not know anything about as of now because the company has not released any information relative to that product?

Elk - Suffice it to say that you, nor I, know that to actually be the case. The comment that you posted is based 100% on speculation on your part. None of us are privy (as of yet) as to what extent, if any, PRED’s products and services can help to cure endometriosis, thereby avoiding the need for surgery. I believe that it is irresponsible on your part to post a message of that type without having any concrete and defensible basis for your message. If you do have such knowledge, please post your source. If you can post anything that confirms that PRED does not have such capability, I will be the first to issue a public apology to you on this board.

Debt (e.g. the ability to secure a loan), no matter where you are in the world, is first and foremost, a function of creditworthiness. CITIC is the largest state-owned enterprise in China. Governments achieve desired social policy through the provisions within their tax codes and the allocation of capital. China has now eliminated the “one child” policy that has been prevalent in their society for the past 40-50 years. While the government is now encouraging families to have more than one child, they are finding that a disproportionate percentage of their child-bearing women are having a difficult time getting pregnant due to the negative effects of endometriosis. In an attempt to address the endometriosis issue, the Chinese government is encouraging companies that have products and services (e.g. Artguide and FertilityDx) that diagnose and treat endometriosis to establish operations in China. Enter PRED.

CITIC Bank was originally organized to fund life science and biopharma companies. With PRED being a life science company, CITIC being a bank that was founded to fund life science companies and the need of the endometriosis problem to be addressed on a country-wide basis, it is easy for one to conclude that any funding needs that PRED might have might be more easily accommodated by CITIC Bank. Time will tell.

From what I understand, NASDAQ approval was only two days away when the Hindenburg report was released. Coincidental timing or a carefully orchestrated and perfectly timed release to at least temporarily prevent the uplisting from occurring? Who knows. We can all form our own opinion, but I personally believe that the Hindenburg report was intentionally released when it was to postpone the uplisting, drive down the price of the stock and create an opportunity for the shorts to profit.

Sometimes actresses allow revealing to be taken of them under the impression that they will never be released to the general public. Then, without her permission, the photos are subsequently released by someone else. The actress from that point on is presumed to have endorsed the photo release and she is then labeled “a slut” by society. Not fair.

The Justice Department has a train depot in Los Angeles and I think that they will be making a stop there within the very near future. I heard that they have an unoccupied seat that they really need to fill resulting from their responsibility “to protect the public”.

The guys at NASDAQ are not stupid. The last thing that they want is to approve any company to trade on their exchange that is not qualified or worthy of the privilege. PRED took a huge PR hit (not to mention being extremely humiliated) when the were delisted from the OTCQX Exchange, no doubt. But the question is “Were they delisted because of something that the company did, something that someone that was formerly associated with the company did, were they a victim of the fraudulent Hindenburg Group report or a victim of the OTCQX’s negligence and possibly even being paid off?”

While the Hindenburg report had been a matter of public record for more than 3 months prior to the OTCQX approving PRED to be uplisted to their exchange, they apparently were grossly negligent and did not properly vet the allegations within the report. Either that or they were well aware of said allegations and went ahead (at the paid request of a group of short sellers) and approved PRED for uplisting, knowing full well that within a couple of weeks after the share price had risen, they would delist them based on “public concern” (e.g. the allegations within the Hindenburg report), which would cause the share price to drop dramatically and quickly, thereby giving the group of short sellers another chance to profit. While that is admittedly a conspiracy theory deluxe, it is certainly within the realm of possibility given the shady reputation of the OTC and the market makers that service those groups of stocks.

Another alternative scenario would be that the folks at OTCQX just flat screwed up and were never even knowledgeable of the Hindenburg report that had been previously issued because they failed to perform proper due diligence. Then, after they were uplisted (to the surprise of the Hindenburg Group and the group of other short sellers, conspiring market makers and conspiring brokerage firms because they were shocked that the OTCQX had not investigated the allegations within the report), the previously named parties, in unison, flooded the OTCQX offices with calls and written correspondence asking them to look into the allegations within the Hindenburg report as they had a responsibility to “protect the public”. Then, after reading the scary content of that report, rather than conducting a thorough investigation, the OTCQX got scared that they might have really screwed up by uplisting PRED, so they decided to immediately delist them from the OTCQX in an attempt to “protect the public” from a crooked company. If such is the case, then you would have to think that the OTCQX would have had to have taken a PR hit for being irresponsible and grossly negligent by not thoroughly vetting the company prior to uplisting them and that someone at the OTCQX would have had to have paid the price for their negligence.

Either way, the being delisted from the OTCQX was a really screwed up deal. Hopefully, in the very near future, the company will announce major deals that will help to move the price up to the appropriate level, the NASDAQ will complete their investigatory process to properly get the company, its operations, its officers and directors (both current and past) and a decision will be made to approve PRED for uplisting to the NASDAQ.

Time will tell.

Exactly how many words has Brad uttered to you? Most of the longs that are upset, are upset because of something that someone posted on this message board something that was going to happen. Many went as far as to give specific dates or narrow time periods in which those things would occur. When the events did not happen, there was a lot of disappointment, followed by frustration. Those who are angry, are angry because of a missed deadline or date that was set by someone other than the company. Is that really fair? As a long that has a ton of shares (at least by my personal investment standards), I find myself becoming disappointed and irritated by the seemingly lack of concern on the part of management. Then, when I stop to realize that I am getting upset at the company for breaching a date that they did not set, it puts it all in proper perspective.

Zugi - I share the same high level of confidence in my investment that Brian obviously has in his investment. Perhaps mine is related to the fact that I have personally met most of the higher level individuals at PRED. While many posters question Bradley’s ethics, I can tell you that of all the things that I could question about PRED’s business and the quality (or lack thereof) of their senior management team members and the Board of Directors members, Bradley’s moral and ethical standards are at the BOTTOM of that list. He has been unjustly maligned by people such as Reverse Long and others that have never even met him. Unfortunately, that is part of the problem with this board.

Zugi - I am not privy as to whether PRED communicated any type of response to OTCQX or not, so it would be inappropriate for me to respond to that line of reasoning. Rather than make up an answer to make it look like I know one way or the other, I think that the responsible and honest think to say to you is that I just don’t know if, or to what extent, they might have filed a response with the folks at the OTCQX.

It sure can be “entertaining” if that’s what we want to call it. Ha.

I personally think that it becomes pretty obvious from reading the various posts as to who “really” knows some of the things that are “really” going on in the company (certainly not all, but many) versus others that are just throwing darts at a board and hoping that other board participants will consider them to be a credible source. Each poster should decide who they believe is a credible source and who is not.

Sorry Reverse Long, but I consider you to be the most unreliable source of information. I think you should change your alias to “FOG HORN”.

Absolutely! Between DTC reports and NOBO list reconciliations, it is possible for any exchange or investigatory agency to know EXACTLY who owns shares, how many shares they own and how many shares they acquired or disposed of over whatever period of time is subject to the investigation. Moreover, the guys at PRED can do the same thing. You or I can’t perform such an investigation because we are not officers or directors at PRED and therefore will not be given access to the DTC reports or the NOBO list.

Brian - your theory seems very realistic. Obviously, anyone that proposes an opinion as to a possible reason(s) for the delisting from the OTCQX Exchange is simply giving their opinions, ideas or theories. The exchange of ideas and theories is what the messages boards were created for. I find that process to be intellectually stimulating, especially when someone has an opinion or theory that differs from mine (kind of food for thought). Some day, hopefully in the not too distant future, we will all know THE reason for the delisting. Until then, it’s just as you say - all “theories” and “speculation”.

You need to remind your broker that he is the one that allowed you to buy PRED shares in the first place do he obviously is just as ignorant as you are. As a result, you have decided to move your account to a “smarter” firm.

Great questions!

Shorts being involved in market activity is actually a good deal because they help to provide liquidity to the market. It’s the illegal “naked” shorting that should be eliminated. Theoretically, it would be possible to have a billion shares (or more) naked shorted even though a company only has 200 million shares of its stock issued and outstanding. Naked shorting creates shares that do not actually exist. That’s totally messed up and should either be eliminated or the market makers and brokerage firms that allow it to occur should be held financially liable in the event that the short seller cannot meet his margin call.

THEORETICALLY, all shorts (legal and naked) will eventually have to cover if the share price goes up to a level that results in them getting a margin call. However, many believe that most of the “naked” short selling was done by investors in foreign countries. As such, they are not within the jurisdiction of the Justice Department and the SEC, so their failure to cover their short position, or put up more money as a result of a margin call, will most assuredly never be enforced. If the SEC would pass a law that held the market makers and/or brokerage firms financially responsible for allowing stocks to be naked shorted by parties that fail to cover their short positions, then a lot of that type of illegal activity might be stopped in its tracks. Unfortunately, the market makers essentially have a controlled monopoly and they set the rules however they want them to be. Obvious, they will never make themselves culpable for that type of activity (which they themselves allowed to occur). It is a racket and will continue to occur until such time as ORED is approved for uplisting to a national exchange..

Good evening Zugi,

I think that the delist from OTCQX back down to the Pink Sheets was a direct result of the OTCQX having a knee-jerk reaction once they became aware of the Hindenburg report. While I do not know for certain, I personally believe that the OTCQX failed to perform adequate due diligence on PRED before they approved them for uplisting. As we all know, the Hindenburg report was issued in June. Unfortunately, for whatever reason, it is my belief that they either negligently overlooked the Hindenburg report or they did not want to believe it. Then, after PRED was uplisted, the folks at Hindenburg got some of their co-conspirators (e.g. market makers, short sellers, and certain unethical brokerage firms) to call or write the officials at the OTCQX Exchange and told them that they had an obligation to protect the public and that they should immediately delist PRED until a thorough investigation could be conducted. Not wanting to be held accountable for massive shareholder losses in the event that the content of the Hindenburg report proved to be true, I think that the OTCQX officials made the decision to totally delist PRED until such time that they could conduct a thorough investigation. That is strictly my opinion, but I do know that there are a lot of unscrupulous market makers that are involved in PRED and a bunch of unethical and co-conspiring brokerage firms that were going along for the ride and allowing shares to be deposited into their firms (that they normally would not accept since PRED is a Pink Sheet Company) so that they could in turn lend them out to short sellers at extremely high commission rates. You can bet your boots that NASDAQ will thoroughly get all allegations on the Hindenburg report before they render a decision regarding PRED’s application to uplist. Like you said sir, time will tell.

Zugi- While I wish I could agree with your statement that “no buying is being done by institutional investors”, I can’t. I think that Patience is absolutely correct in saying that most of the recent purchasing has been done by one or more institutional investors or hedge funds. Because of the “Penny Stock Exemption” status that PRED has been given, the internal policy of many (I did not say all) institutions allows their shares to be purchased. It also technically allows the brokers that work for the firm to recommend the stock to their clients (although many will be reluctant to do so). We could only wish that all of the recent buying has been by non-institutional investors (e.g. retail investors). If so, that would mean that the institutional investors are still sitting on the sideline with a lot of “dry powder” available to buy even more shares in the coming months ahead. Can you imagine what that type of upside buying pressure would result from that type of sudden buy/side demand?

I hope and pray that you are correct, but I doubt it. Retail investors generally do not purchase 50,000 to 100,000 shares within a 5 minute window of time. As to the required SEC filings, those only have to be done on a quarterly basis and the quarter has not ended yet. Also, if several institutional investors or hedge funds are purchasing the shares, the share purchases might be spread out in a manner that no one particular buyer has to file the required quarterly disclosure form with the SEC.

Great post Patience - Very unemotional and very well thought out. I salute you for also being a great writer.

There is an infinite number of shares that can be “naked” shorted as those shares do not actually exist.

Yeah Piper, the 46,025 shares that you claim to own are probably more than the rest of us on this site own - combined. Maybe that’s why our collective chorus of whines is not as loud as your individual whines.

What? Are you serious when you say that you don’t believe that Piper has “a source”? Are you telling us that “the Magic 8 Ball” no longer qualifies as “a source”. Please greencandle, tell me that you are just kidding. Next thing you will be telling us is that “Santa Claus is not real” and that an “Ouija Board” is not an accurate predictor as to the future price of PRED shares. Noooooooooooo!!

Surfgreen,

In your last post, you wrote:

“The attacks are running out of juice”.

What are you basing that statement on? I see 400,000 to 700,000 shares of volume basically every day for the past several months and the share price has gone down almost everyday within that same timeframe. How can one therefore conclude that “the attack is running out of juice”? I am not trying to be confrontational, I just do not understand your logic and would appreciate you expanding your thoughts on the subject.

The continued high daily volume, continued share price decline and an unlimited supply of “naked” short shares still being available everyday leads me to conclude that the stock is still under attack and will continue to be under attack until the company releases some MEANINGFUL and quantifiable news.

Fantastic post jimstern. Very well thought out in terms of presenting a history as to how a large number of shares could have been accumulated by one or more parties. Very well articulated.

I totally agree Patience. The next few months could prove to be very interesting as the forces of good and evil meet for one final battle! My money is on the long side of the trade.

Good evening Patience,

In your last post, you wrote:

“So, we have a huge amount of shares being purchased by big boys, who will be holding these shares for a substantial amount of time, as they know how big this company will be.”

While I certainly agree with you, I have one major concern. While it is true that a huge amount of shares are being bought by a purchaser that “knows how big the company can be”, a huge amount of shares are also being sold by someone that is equally convinced that the company will never be what the large purchaser believes it will be. There has been approximately 30-35 million shares sold during the past three months. Presumably, the only ones that have ever owned that many shares are former insiders at the company. That's scary because you would think that if anyone knows how far the company “can” or “cannot go” it would be them. What made them lose their faith? Are they selling because they are bitter “former” insiders or do they know something that the rest of us do not know?

There is no demonstrated support at this level; nor has there been any support for quite some time. Large buyers are simply buying more shares as the price continues to decline. There is a difference.