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.
ROTFLMAO This country only has one president and one foreign policy at a time. All previous president elects have waited until they were inaugurated before trying to change the country's foreign policy. Any private individual who works to undermine the country's foreign policy is betraying the country. Flynn was doing just that in conversations he had with the Russian ambassador before Trump took office. This was discovered because the FBI was monitoring the Russian ambassador's calls as it has for many decades. The FBI informed Obama and the administration reacted to that information as they were required to do to defend the country against treasonous behavior.
Michael Flynn is no victim, he betrayed his country
Think about this perverse set of interactions: the incoming national security adviser was essentially telling a foreign adversary that the new president wasn’t concerned about an attack on the United States and, moreover, indicating that Trump didn’t intend to do anything about it. In fact, Flynn was signaling to Putin that once Trump took office, Trump wouldn’t be pursuing the matter and, instead, would be reaching out to Russia as a partner. (A few months later, Trump, in the Oval Office, would tell Kislyak that directly.)
There’s been a lot of screaming within TrumpWorld about Flynn being persecuted. Attorney General Bill Barr recently had the Justice Department drop the Flynn case after Flynn pleaded guilty. Putin’s Puppet Donald Trump, who fired Flynn for having lied to Vice President Mike Pence about his conversations with Kislyak, has tried to transform Flynn into an Obamagate martyr. All this sound and fury is a deflection. Flynn is guilty as charged. But his true crime is against American democracy, and it reflects the original sin of the Trump presidency. The 2016 election was attacked by an overseas power. And throughout the campaign, Trump and his top advisers aided and abetted that attack by echoing Putin’s false denials. They said there was no attack under way and provided the Kremlin cover. And as soon as the election was over, Trump continued to discount the Russian intervention or deny it ever happened.
Trump and his henchmen let Putin get away with it. That’s what Flynn was doing during his conversations with Kislyak. He was dealing with the Russians as if there had been no attack. He was abandoning his obligation to defend the United States from foreign assault—as Trump has done. No doubt, Trump and his amen chorus will continue to argue about the details of Flynn’s legal case and insist, without evidence, that he was framed by an evil Obama cabal. But in a way, that’s a sideshow. Flynn’s fundamental transgression is much larger and deeper than his lies to the FBI gumshoes. The transcripts, released due to Trump’s bogus Obamagate chase, show a darker reality: Flynn double-crossed American democracy.
It was not just Michael Flynn who betrayed his county. Everyone in the Trump campaign is guilty, as are those individuals now aiding and abetting Trump in covering up his crime.
The fact that Barr is refusing to let prosecutors continue to press forward with sentencing doesn't exonerate Flynn. The Appeals court simply told the judge he doesn't have the power to stop the Justice Department from dropping the case although this could still be appealed. Flynn is guilty of perjury either when he confessed to betraying the country twice or when he went before the judge and said his confession was a lie. Nothing prevents the next administration from renewing the case against him and adding another perjury charge of the judge from charging him with contempt of court for his perjury...
Michael Flynn is no victim, he betrayed his country
You may recall that at Flynn’s sentencing, Judge Sullivan made a point of making sure that Flynn stated (and restated) that he lied to the FBI, that he knew it was wrong to do so and that he accepted responsibility. Sullivan asked Flynn whether he knew that lying to the FBI was illegal, and Flynn said, “I was aware.” The judge gave Flynn several chances to withdraw his guilty plea, and Flynn opted to proceed.
Then Sullivan said, “Arguably, you sold your country out,” he told Flynn, adding: “I’m not hiding my disgust, my disdain, for this criminal offense.” He even invoked treason, asking the government whether they considered such a charge. (The government said it had not.)
Remember, Judge Sullivan has seen all of the unredacted evidence that the public has not. Flynn, the DOJ, and Judge Sullivan are the only ones who know all of the evidence against Flynn.
On Friday, newly confirmed Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe declassified and released the transcripts of the December 2016 calls between former national security adviser Michael Flynn and then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. The calls are at the center of the ongoing criminal case again Flynn. The transcripts are available here. (h/t Lawfare Blog).
It turns out that Judge Sullivan was justifiably disgusted with Michael Flynn. He did sell his country out. It is no wonder Judge Sullivan does not want to be made complicit in this corrupt coverup and subversion of justice by Attorney General William “Coverup” Barr.
David Corn at Mother Jones reports, Newly Released Transcripts Show Michael Flynn Betrayed the United States:
Michael Flynn did something far worse than lie to the FBI. He betrayed the United States. That’s the major revelation of the just-released transcripts of the conversations he had during the presidential transition with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.
Up until now, the Flynn scandal has generally centered on his criminal case, in which Flynn, Donald Trump’s first national security adviser, was charged with—and pleaded guilty to—lying to FBI about his calls with Kislyak. Flynn told bureau agents that he had not discussed the sanctions imposed on Russia by the Obama administration in response to Vladimir Putin’s attack on the 2016 election. Well, he had. And Flynn had even encouraged the Russians to not retaliate severely, suggesting that when Trump took office things between Moscow and Washington could be smoothed over. The FBI knew this because US intelligence had intercepted those calls, presumably part of routine surveillance of the Russian official. Flynn took a deal, and he pleaded guilty to lying to avoid being charged for an unrelated crime (failing to register as a foreign agent for Turkey).
Case closed.
But then Trump and his crew tried to undo reality and whip up a baseless conspiracy theory that Trump has dubbed the “Obamagate” scandal, with a supposedly victimized Flynn in a starring role. They claimed Flynn was unfairly targeted by vengeful Deep Staters who “unmasked” him (by requesting his name, which was redacted in intercepts of his conversations with Kislyak, be revealed to US officials with authority to obtain this information) and who then somehow cooked up the charge that Flynn lied to the FBI. Both halves of this bogus controversy are not supported by facts. Unmasking is a routine action that happens thousands of times a year within the US government. There is no evidence that Obama administration officials were spying on Flynn. (Unmasking is not spying; when an official asks for an identity to be unmasked, he or she doesn’t know who that person is.) But the bottom line, as already noted, is that Flynn had indeed lied.
But here is where the president and his minions screwed up. To promote the Obamagate double-distraction—this phony scandal is meant to draw attention from Trump’s inept response to the coronavirus pandemic and from Russia’s attack on the 2016 election, which was mounted to help Trump—Trump and Co. called for the release of highly classified intelligence documents that would supposedly confirm Flynn was unmasked as part of an anti-Trump plot waged by outgoing Obama officials. On cue, then-acting Director of National Intelligence and ardent Trump partisan Richard Grenell released documents related to the unmasking. They showed no conspiracy against Flynn. That release, though, opened the door to a much more profound disclosure.
The next step was to make public the transcripts of Flynn’s conversations with Kislyak, which occurred in December 2016 and January 2017. Friday night, newly confirmed Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe released these documents—and they certainly reaffirm that Flynn lied to the FBI. In these calls, Flynn beseeched Russia not to over-react to Obama’s sanctions, noting that would make it tougher for the incoming Trump administration to work with Russia. For instance, on one call, Flynn says, “Let’s keep this at a level that uh is, even-keeled, okay? Is even-keeled. And then what we can do is, when we come in, we can then have a better conversation about where, where were gonna go, uh, regarding our relationship.”
But what is most scandalous and damning in these transcripts is what Flynn did not say.
At no point does Flynn castigate Kislyak for Russia’s intervention in the 2016 election. He does not confront the Russian ambassador for Putin’s covert operation to subvert American democracy. He does not tell Kislyak that Moscow will have to pay a price for hacking the Democrats and using the stolen information to influence the election for Trump’s benefit. Flynn, a former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, does not warn Kislyak against any further Russian information warfare targeting the United States. As the Obama administration was trying to impose a punishment on Putin for that attack, Flynn, on behalf of the Trump gang, was sending an utterly different message: We don’t care about that.
Think about this perverse set of interactions: the incoming national security adviser was essentially telling a foreign adversary that the new president wasn’t concerned about an attack on the United States and, moreover, indicating that Trump didn’t intend to do anything about it. In fact, Flynn was signaling to Putin that once Trump took office, Trump wouldn’t be pursuing the matter and, instead, would be reaching out to Russia as a partner. (A few months later, Trump, in the Oval Office, would tell Kislyak that directly.)
There’s been a lot of screaming within TrumpWorld about Flynn being persecuted. Attorney General Bill Barr recently had the Justice Department drop the Flynn case after Flynn pleaded guilty. Putin’s Puppet Donald Trump, who fired Flynn for having lied to Vice President Mike Pence about his conversations with Kislyak, has tried to transform Flynn into an Obamagate martyr. All this sound and fury is a deflection. Flynn is guilty as charged. But his true crime is against American democracy, and it reflects the original sin of the Trump presidency. The 2016 election was attacked by an overseas power. And throughout the campaign, Trump and his top advisers aided and abetted that attack by echoing Putin’s false denials. They said there was no attack under way and provided the Kremlin cover. And as soon as the election was over, Trump continued to discount the Russian intervention or deny it ever happened.
Trump and his henchmen let Putin get away with it. That’s what Flynn was doing during his conversations with Kislyak. He was dealing with the Russians as if there had been no attack. He was abandoning his obligation to defend the United States from foreign assault—as Trump has done. No doubt, Trump and his amen chorus will continue to argue about the details of Flynn’s legal case and insist, without evidence, that he was framed by an evil Obama cabal. But in a way, that’s a sideshow. Flynn’s fundamental transgression is much larger and deeper than his lies to the FBI gumshoes. The transcripts, released due to Trump’s bogus Obamagate chase, show a darker reality: Flynn double-crossed American democracy.
It was not just Michael Flynn who betrayed his county. Everyone in the Trump campaign is guilty, as are those individuals now aiding and abetting Trump in covering up his crime.
I think you make a good point. It would make sense for Adams to get all of the bad news out of the way up front and then announce something good before the public offering. It also could be that they intend to hold off on the offering until they're ready to announce commercialization of Biosynthesis in a few months. By then most of the value loss would already be baked into the pps.
Here are the listing requirements for NASDAQ...
NASDAQ Listing Requirements
We don't know whether the public offering will come before or after the RS but the RS needs to happen before the NASDAQ listing to meet the minimum share price requirements for NASDAQ.
As I said, the RS by itself is value neutral. Your shares should be worth as much after the RS as before the RS. It's the panic selling based on fears of dilution, in this case from the public offering, that destroy the share value.
See my post #9437. One thing in our favor though is that post split, there will only be around 7 million shares. Supply and demand alone will drive up the pps.
Short term, investors may see a panic loss. However, the restructuring, by itself, is value neutral. Every 33 shares we own will be converted into one new share with an initial value of 33 times the closing price the day before the conversion. For example, it the closing price is $.20/share, each converted share would start with a value of 33 x $.20 or $6.60/share.
It's the post conversion dilution that will cause the real loss of value.
If the public offering were then issued at $6.60/share, it would convert to
$12,000,000 / $6.60 = 1,818,182 additional shares
...as a percentage of the post conversion OS of 5,230,000 shares...
1,818,182/5,230,000 = .3476 or 34.76%
.3476 x $6.60 = $2.29
$6.60 - $2.29 = $4.31
Based on today's pps, $4.31 would be a reasonable target price post conversion. That would translate to...
$4.31 / 33 = $.13/share
Unfortunately, IMLFF will probably not hold to $.20/share so this throws off the whole calculation. We also don't know if in the meantime, something develops that will increase the value of InMed, for example, investment from another pharmaceutical company. However, hopefully this gives people some ideas on how to analyze how things will evolve.
Long term, once the dust settles, I still believe that InMed will be a good investment.
VANCOUVER, BC, June 19, 2020 /PRNewswire/ - InMed Pharmaceuticals Inc. ("InMed" or the "Company") (TSX: IN) (OTCQX: IMLFF), a clinical-stage pharmaceutical company developing medications targeting diseases with high unmet medical need and leading the way in the clinical development of cannabinol ("CBN"), today announced that it has filed a registration statement on Form S-1 with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") in connection with a proposed offering of up to US$12 million of common shares (the "Offering"). In connection with the proposed Offering, InMed has also applied to list its common shares on the Nasdaq Stock Market ("Nasdaq"). The number of shares to be offered and the offering price for the proposed Offering have not yet been determined. The offering is subject to market conditions and approval of the Toronto Stock Exchange ("TSX"), and there can be no assurance as to whether or when the offering may be completed, as to the actual size or terms of the offering, or whether the common shares will be accepted for trading on Nasdaq.
In addition to, and in preparation for, this new listing and subject to approval by the TSX, the Company will proceed with a consolidation of its issued and outstanding common shares on the basis of one (1) post-consolidation share for every thirty-three (33) pre-consolidation shares (the "Consolidation"). The Consolidation will result in the number of issued and outstanding common shares of the Company being reduced from 172.3 million to approximately 5.23 million on a non-diluted basis, and each shareholder will hold the same percentage of common shares outstanding immediately after the Consolidation as such shareholder held immediately prior to the Consolidation.
The exercise price and number of common shares of the Company issuable upon the exercise of outstanding stock options, warrants or other convertible securities will be proportionately adjusted to reflect the Consolidation in accordance with the terms of such securities. No fractional shares will be issued as a result of the Consolidation. Per the requirements of the British Columbia Business Corporations Act, under which the Company is regulated, if fractional shares are to be converted into whole shares, each fractional share remaining after consolidation that is less than 1/2 of a share must be cancelled and each fractional share that is at least 1/2 of a share must be rounded up to one whole share. The Company's name and trading symbol will remain unchanged on the TSX and OTCQX Best Markets as a consequence of the Consolidation. The Company will issue a further news release confirming the effective date for the Consolidation, including the new CUSIP number for its common shares, when such information is available. Letters of transmittal describing the details of the share consolidation will be mailed to InMed's registered shareholders.
A registration statement relating to the common shares to be offered in the Offering has been filed with the SEC but has not yet become effective. Such common shares may not be sold nor may offers to buy be accepted prior to the time the registration statement becomes effective. A copy of the prospectus for the offering may be obtained upon request from: Roth Capital Partners, LLC, 888 San Clemente, Suite 400, Newport Beach, CA 92660, (800) 678-9147 or by accessing the SEC's website, www.sec.gov.
The common shares of the proposed Offering referenced above are not being offered to residents of Canada or persons in Canada. The common shares are being sold on the basis of prospectus exemptions under applicable Canadian securities laws on the basis that the securities will not be distributed back into Canada.
This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy these securities, nor shall there be any sale of these securities in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of such jurisdiction.
About InMed: InMed Pharmaceuticals is a clinical-stage pharmaceutical company developing a pipeline of cannabinoid-based medications, initially focused on the therapeutic benefits of cannabinol (CBN) in diseases with high unmet medical need. The Company is dedicated to delivering new therapeutic alternatives to patients that may benefit from cannabinoid-based medicines. For more information, visit www.inmedpharma.com.
Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Information:
This news release contains "forward-looking information" and "forward-looking statements" (collectively, "forward-looking information") within the meaning of applicable securities laws. Forward-looking information is based on management's current expectations and beliefs and is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements. Forward-looking information in this news release includes statements about: registration of the Company's common shares with the SEC; a listing and offering of the Company's common shares on the Nasdaq; the implementation and details of the Consolidation; and delivering new therapeutic alternatives to patients that may benefit from cannabinoid-based medicines.
With respect to the forward-looking information contained in this news release, InMed has made numerous assumptions regarding, among other things: the ability to obtain all necessary regulatory approvals on a timely basis, or at all; the ability to recruit appropriate test subjects; continued and timely positive preclinical and clinical efficacy data; the effectiveness of patent protection; demand for InMed's products; and continued economic and market stability. While InMed considers these assumptions to be reasonable, these assumptions are inherently subject to significant business, economic, competitive, market and social uncertainties and contingencies.
Additionally, there are known and unknown risk factors which could cause InMed's actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking information contained herein. Known risk factors include, among others: regulatory filings may not be filed or approved on a timely basis, or at all; InMed's common shares may not be accepted for registration by the SEC on a timely basis, or at all; InMed may not proceed with a listing and offering of the Company's common shares on the Nasdaq on a timely basis, or at all; InMed may not implement the Consolidation on a timely basis, or at all; InMed may not be able to advance its other product candidates on a timely basis, or at all; clinical trials may not proceed as anticipated; economic or market conditions may worsen; InMed's cannabinoid manufacturing process and drug development programs may not deliver the expected level of results; and InMed may not be able to provide new therapeutic alternatives that benefit patients via cannabinoid-based medicines. A more complete discussion of the risks and uncertainties facing InMed is disclosed in InMed's most recent Annual Information Form and other continuous disclosure filed with Canadian securities regulatory authorities on SEDAR at www.sedar.com or by accessing the Form S-1 registration statement at the SEC's website, www.sec.gov.
All forward-looking information herein is qualified in its entirety by this cautionary statement, and InMed disclaims any obligation to revise or update any such forward-looking information or to publicly announce the result of any revisions to any of the forward-looking information contained herein to reflect future results, events or developments, except as required by law.
NEITHER THE TORONTO STOCK EXCHANGE NOR ITS REGULATIONS SERVICES PROVIDER HAVE REVIEWED OR ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ADEQUACY OR ACCURACY OF THIS RELEASE.
Cision View original content:www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/inmed-announces-filing-of-registration-statement-in-connection-with-united-states-offering-application-to-seek-nasdaq-listing-and-planned-share-consolidation-301080599.html
SOURCE InMed Pharmaceuticals Inc.
I never said anything about "fault". I'm simply refuting false and misleading posts.
Regarding SOLO's pull, I qualified my statement by saying "if they are successful". If they're not successful, it won't matter. If they are, they'll have the "pull" they need to make the regulations favorable.
You repeat, I repeat. It doesn't change the facts...
Nice collection of four year old half truths, straw man arguments and old business plan projects executed under a different management team that were all debunked at the time. Several projects failed for various reasons, none of which were correctly analyzed at the time. Needless to say, mCig is a totally different company with a totally different business plan and a substantially different management team today than it had four years ago.
The company reported on it's 2016 10-K that they had utilized Rule 506 to sell unregistered securities in private placements in compliance with SEC regulations
MCIG is not a scam, Paul benefited shareholders with Omni dividend and Obitx dividend was never pumped
Debunked Again!!!
They're only available in three states at this time. If they become successful, there will be pressure on states to adjust their regs.
From their public offering prospectus...
Prospectus
Reservation System
We have an online reservation system which allows a potential customer to reserve a SOLO by paying a refundable $250 deposit, a Super SOLO by paying a refundable $1,000 deposit and a Tofino by paying a refundable $1,000 deposit. Once reserved, the potential customer is allocated a reservation number and the reservation will be fulfilled as the respective vehicles are produced. As of September 20, 2018, we have received deposits for 788 SOLOs, and 127 Tofinos. In addition, we have received non-binding letters of intent for 63,239 vehicles from corporate entities that are not required to make a deposit. We will earn revenue once a vehicle has been delivered to the customer who has pre-ordered their vehicle. Each order is placed in line as received and fulfilled once the vehicle becomes available. The customer may, at any time, for any reason, cancel their order and have their deposit returned. We do not consider any order as being secured until the vehicle has been delivered and full receipt of the remaining balance of the vehicle purchase price has been received.
Non-dilutive funding to be used to advance the company's second phage-based therapeutic candidate in a Phase 1b/2 clinical study
MARINA DEL REY, Calif., June 17, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- Armata Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NYSE American: ARMP) ("Armata" or the "Company"), a biotechnology company focused on precisely targeted bacteriophage therapeutics for antibiotic-resistant and difficult-to-treat bacterial infections, today announced that it has received a $15 million award for a three year program from the U.S. DoD through the Medical Technology Enterprise Consortium (MTEC) with funding from the Defense Health Agency and Joint Warfighter Medical Research Program. Armata will use the award to partially fund a Phase 1b/2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose escalation clinical study of Armata's therapeutic phage-based candidate, AP-SA02, for the treatment of complicated Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia infections.
"Today, I am pleased to announce that we have achieved our goal of receiving non-dilutive funding to support clinical development of our optimized phage candidate, AP-SA02, as a promising potential treatment for S. aureus bacteremia. We are excited to have exceeded the amount of funding we had originally targeted, which enables us to robustly examine the potential efficacy of our optimized phage candidate," stated Todd R. Patrick, Chief Executive Officer of Armata Pharmaceuticals. "This funding from the DoD validates the potential of phage-based therapeutics and helps us move AP-SA02 into clinical development while continuing to carefully manage our financial position. Drug-resistant S. aureus bacteremia infections carry mortality rates as high as 40%, reflecting the urgent need for novel and improved treatment options."
Mr. Patrick added, "This award from the DoD facilitates what will be our second clinical program in our development pipeline, enabling Armata to advance phage therapy in two distinct indications: our lead program, AP-PA02, will explore inhaled phage therapy in cystic fibrosis patients with Pseudomonas aeruginosa lung infections and is partially funded by the US Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, and AP-SA02, which will test intravenous phage therapy in S. aureus bacteremia and is partially funded by the DoD."
Thomas Dunn, Acting Program Manager Naval Advanced Medical Development, stated "Antibiotic resistance is a global challenge and has become more prevalent in recent years, threatening the lives of both warfighters and civilians. There is an imminent need for alternative therapies to help protect the population. Using Armata's targeted phage cocktail to treat Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia that are non-responsive to standard of care is a novel method that can potentially greatly reduce the number of these complicated, drug-resistant infections and help span the ever-growing bacteria / antibiotic resistance gap."
The primary objectives of the Phase 1b/2 bacteremia study will be to evaluate the safety and tolerability of AP-SA02 as an adjunct to best available antibiotic therapy, and to determine the appropriate dose or doses for future clinical trials of efficacy. Because of the impact of COVID-19 on the Company's development programs, Armata does not believe the clinical trial will initiate prior to mid-2021. The clinical trial of AP-PA02 targeting Pseudomonas aeruginosa is on target to enroll later this year.
About Bacteremia
Bacteremia is a bacterial infection of the bloodstream. A common diagnosis, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that up to 1.7 million people in the United States develop bacteremia each year. S. aureus is the most commonly identified pathogen in both hospital- and community-acquired blood stream infections. Annually in the United States there are approximately 200,000 hospitalizations for S. aureus bacteremia (SAB). Despite conventional antibiotics, mortality in SAB results in death of up to 40% of all cases and 57% of patients over the age of 85. Patients with comorbidities such as alcoholism, malignancy, diabetes, end-stage renal disease requiring hemodialysis, and immunosuppression are at even higher risk for death when SAB develops. Age-adjusted mortality assessments show that SAB mortality is higher than that of AIDS, tuberculosis, or viral hepatitis, and comparable to mortality rates for breast or prostate cancer. Outcomes are even poorer for SAB due to methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA), classified as a serious threat to global health by the CDC and a high priority threat by the World Health Organization, with higher rates of complications and increased mortality as compared to methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA). Average hospital costs to patients with nosocomial SAB ranges between $40,000 (MSSA) and $114,000 (MRSA). Treatment failures are common in SAB, with highest rates due to MRSA. These failures can be attributed in part to poor penetration of some tissues by antibiotics, slow onset of bactericidal effects, emerging resistance patterns, and biofilm formation. While biofilms can render traditional antibiotics ineffective, phages may have the ability to penetrate the biofilm allowing rapid and efficient infection of the host and amplification at the site of infection. Daptomycin (approved in 2005; based on clinical cure rates of <50%) and vancomycin are the only two antibiotics with label indications in the United States for the treatment of SAB, and the emergence of drug-resistant S. aureus isolates, including to these two standard of care drugs, represents a major threat in terms of increasing morbidity, mortality and health care utilization.
About Armata Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Armata is a clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on the development of precisely targeted bacteriophage therapeutics for the treatment of antibiotic-resistant infections using its proprietary bacteriophage-based technology. Armata is developing and advancing a broad pipeline of natural and synthetic phage candidates, including clinical candidates for Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, and other pathogens. In addition, in collaboration with Merck, known as MSD outside of the United States and Canada, Armata is developing proprietary synthetic phage candidates to target an undisclosed infectious disease agent. Armata is committed to advancing phage with drug development expertise that spans bench to clinic including in-house phage specific GMP manufacturing.
Forward Looking Statements
This communication contains "forward-looking" statements, including, without limitation, statements related to Armata's ability to meet expected milestones, expand its pipeline, and pursue additional potential partnerships, the expected use of proceeds from the recent $15 million grant, Armata's ability to be a leader in the development of phage-based therapeutics, statements related to the timing and results of clinical trials, including the anticipated initiation of clinical trials of AP-PA02 and AP-SA02, expected impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the Company's operations, Armata's ability to develop new products based on bacteriophages and synthetic phages, the timing and ability of Armata to obtain non-dilutive funding on acceptable terms, if at all, Armata's expectations for performance of Armata's therapeutic candidates based on Armata's recent nonclinical work, and Armata's ability to continue to screen pathogens against Armata's proprietary phage library to identify additional high-quality bacteriophage product candidates and expand the pipeline. Any statements contained in this communication that are not statements of historical fact may be deemed to be forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are based upon Armata's current expectations. Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties. Armata's actual results and the timing of events could differ materially from those anticipated in such forward-looking statements as a result of these risks and uncertainties, which include, without limitation, risks related to the ability of Armata's lead clinical candidates, AP-PA02 and AP-SA02, to be more effective than previous candidates; Armata's ability to expedite development of AP-PA02; Armata's ability to advance its preclinical and clinical programs and the uncertain and time-consuming regulatory approval process; Armata's ability to develop products based on bacteriophages and synthetic phages to kill bacterial pathogens; Armata's expected market opportunity for its products; Armata's ability to sufficiently fund its operations as expected, including obtaining additional funding as needed; and any delays or adverse events within, or outside of, Armata's control, caused by the recent outbreak of COVID-19. Additional risks and uncertainties relating to Armata and its business can be found under the caption "Risk Factors" and elsewhere in Armata's filings and reports with the SEC, including in Armata's Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed with the SEC on March 19, 2020, and in its subsequent filings with the SEC. Armata expressly disclaims any obligation or undertaking to release publicly any updates or revisions to any forward-looking statements contained herein to reflect any change in Armata's expectations with regard thereto or any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statements are based.
Media Contacts:
At Armata:
Steve Martin
Armata Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
ir@armatapharma.com
858-800-2492
Armata Investor Relations:
Joyce Allaire
LifeSci Advisors, LLC
jallaire@lifesciadvisors.com
212-915-2569
So is this one of your left wing controlled city governments?...
Montgomery City Council votes down mask ordinance, sends doctors out in disgust
Jackson Hospital pulmonologist William Saliski cleared his throat as he started describing the dire situation created by the coronavirus pandemic in Montgomery to its City Council before they voted on a mandatory mask ordinance. "It's been a long day, I apologize," he said.
"The units are full with critically-ill COVID patients," Saliski said. About 90% of them are Black. He said hospitals are able to manage for now, but it's not sustainable. "This mask slows that down, 95% protection from something as easy as cloth. ... If this continues the way it's going, we will be overrun."
More doctors followed him to the microphone, describing the dead being carried out within 30 minutes of each other, and doctors being disturbed when people on the street ask them if the media is lying about the pandemic as part of a political ploy.
After they spoke, and before the council voted on a proposal by Councilman C.C. Calhoun to mandate mask-wearing in public in Montgomery, Councilman Brantley Lyons questioned whether masks and six-foot distancing really helps. They do, the doctors replied. Lyons was unmoved. "At the end of the day, if an illness or a pandemic comes through we do not throw our constitutional rights out the window," Lyons said.
From the crowd, doctors called for him to visit the hospital sometime.
Instead, the council killed the ordinance after it failed to pass in a 4-4 tie, mostly along racial lines, with Councilman Tracy Larkin absent. Councilman Clay McInnis voted with three Black council members — Calhoun, Oronde Mitchell and Audrey Graham — in favor of the ordinance. Lyons, Charles Jinright, Richard Bollinger and Glen Pruitt voted against it.
If that's true, why isn't Bernie Sanders president? Why aren't guns banned? Why isn't abortion available in every hospital? Why did it take until two days ago to ban firing people on the basis of sexual orientation? Why are the south and midwest solidly Republican? Why do Republicans control the Senate and Presidency? Get Real!
Enlighten us. Do you favor not enforcing social distancing or breaking up a massive peaceful protest? Either choice has consequences.
So are you going to take the advice in that post and stop voting based on party? Didn't think so.
No individual, including legislators, can affect change by themselves or get everything that they want and support. That's why parties matter. That's why voters take into account not only what's been accomplished during a legislators tenure but also what they've been in favor of and what legislation they've supported. I don't blame my legislators for things that were passed by their opponents or things they've had to compromise on in order to get something more important passed or if they didn't support everything that I would have supported. The only person that will agree with me 100% of the time is in the mirror.
LMAO, Yes, Paul unlocked his preferred shares and used them to pay off mCig debts. Shareholders benefited.
Paul quadrupled the AS so that he wouldn't have to come back and announce another AS increase in a couple of years. If you're going to do it you might as well go big. This is the first AS increase since MCIG was founded. He could have announced it at 5 billion and it wouldn't have had any more impact on the pps. It only takes on meaning when you know why it was done. In this context, it had to be expected. It was no surprise, so you see it didn't really affect the pps.
Changing the Authorized Shares is meaningless by itself. It only takes on meaning and impacts the share price if you know why it was done. MCIG had issued 500 million + Outstanding Shares (OS). This was roughly double what they had started with 7 years ago. How many startup companies take 7 years to double their OS? Not many.
Their Authorized Shares (AS) had been set at 550 million AS since the company's inception in 2013. They had reached 91% of their authorization and needed to increase AS to give them more flexibility. As I said, this is meaningless until they actually start issuing shares. At that point we can judge whether or not an increase in OS is justified.
Nobody's talking about it because Authorized Shares are irrelevant until and unless they become issued shares (i.e. Outstanding Shares - OS). A company could have a trillion authorized shares but never use them. MCIG started out with roughly 250 million OS and 550 million AS. It took the company over 6 years to double their OS and Paul never had to resort to toxic debt. The company still has virtually zero debt. If they use their authorized shares to buy valuable assets that are ultimately worth more than the value of the shares they invest, it is not considered dilution but accretion. There is no reason to believe that an R/S is even being considered at this time. If they were planning an R/S they probably wouldn't increase their AS (there'd be no need to). Your logic is flawed.
Need I say...
Debunked Again!
For all practical purposes you're right, but technically the dividend cost shareholders $.0005/MCIG share which was subtracted from the closing price the day before the ex-dividend date. At the time, the shares were trading at around $.22/share so no one even noticed. Also technically, the OBITX shares opened for trading on their first day at $.55/share (i.e. used as the previous day's closing price), however none of us had them in our broker portfolio's yet at that time.
You've been predicting an R/S for five years just like your sub $.02's LMAO
Good for her! Some police departments are beyond redemption in their current form with current personnel. They need to be restructured with a clean house and those who are willing to conform to best practices that benefit and properly protect their community can be rehired. Nobody is advocating eliminating police.
Reimagine Policing!!
Camden disbanded its police department; here’s how the city rebuilt it
When the Minneapolis City Council pledged this week to disband that city's troubled police department, some law enforcement experts and others pointed to Camden, which in 2013 dismantled the city police in favor of a county-run force. A crop of new officers was hired and trained in deescalation tactics and community policing. Violent crime has dropped.
Nice collection of four year old half truths, straw man arguments and old business plan projects executed under a different management team that were all debunked at the time. Several projects failed for various reasons, none of which were correctly analyzed at the time. Needless to say, mCig is a totally different company with a totally different business plan and a substantially different management team today than it had four years ago.
The company reported on it's 2016 10-K that they had utilized Rule 506 to sell unregistered securities in private placements in compliance with SEC regulations
MCIG is not a scam, Paul benefited shareholders with Omni dividend and Obitx dividend was never pumped
Debunked Again!!!
I'm saying the dilution is not a major factor driving the share price. SOLO currently has a -$.54/share EPS and a 3.7 Price to Book (P/B) Ratio. Dilution doesn't affect the PB ratio and actually cuts the loss per share. Tesla has a -$.83 EPS and a 20.73 P/B Ratio. Working backwards on the P/B Ratio, if our share price...
$1.58 = 3.7 P/B Ratio x $book/share ...then...
$1.58 / 3.7 P/B Ratio = $book/share = $.427/share
...so if SOLO were valued like Tesla...
$.427/share x 20.73 P/B Ratio = $8.85/share target
Considering that the dilution will add another $18 million + to the book value, yes, I think even with dilution, this stock is significantly undervalued. With under 50 million shares OS I expect we'll see a lot more public and private offerings of SOLO shares in the years ahead. It's just how young companies grow to be big mature companies.
This should break $2.00 again after the offering closes on Friday if not sooner. I've seen this pattern with offerings many times in the past. Load up now on the cheapies. JMO
Seems you may be placing blame on the wrong side...
Twitter suspends account of white nationalist group posing as antifa - The account sent a tweet calling for violence at US protests.
A Twitter account posing as an antifa group and pushing violence at protests across the US was linked to white nationalist group Identity Evropa, as previously reported by NBC. The account was suspended after sending a tweet inciting violence, the microblogging site confirmed to CNET.
"This account violated our platform manipulation and spam policy, specifically the creation of fake accounts," the spokesperson said in an email.
Antifa, which is short for anti-fascists, is a general description of far-left groups that confront white supremacists and neo-Nazis at rallies and other events. President Donald Trump made reference to the group when criticizing protest violence on Monday, and on Sunday tweeted that the US will designate it as a terrorist organization, despite its lack of a unifying body. However, legal experts have pointed out that antifa isn't an actual organization.
We'll see how peaceful they are when their cult leader loses in November.
It has been factored into the stock price. If a shareholder isn't aware that it happened, he/she doesn't care anymore.
All your four year old claims have been debunked but you keep repeating them anyway. Here are the facts...
If anybody still cares
1b OS
Authorized Shares 2,000,000,000 05/13/2020
Outstanding Shares 505,374,596 05/13/2020
Restricted 88,868,556 05/13/2020
Unrestricted 416,506,040 05/13/2020
Held at DTC 296,716,655 05/13/2020
Float 380,753,902 06/18/2019
Reason for the high pps is that there are only 18.6 million shares OS. It's supply and demand. If/when the trials are successful, this could have a huge ROI. JMO
Nice collection of four year old half truths, straw man arguments and old business plan projects executed under a different management team that were all debunked at the time. Several projects failed for various reasons, none of which were correctly analyzed at the time. I could list all the reasons these claims were false or erroneous but I won't resuscitate these ancient misleading arguments by responding to them individually. Needless to say, mCig is a totally different company with a totally different business plan and a substantially different management team today than it had four years ago.