Although he looks alone, somebody wants him on the phone.
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.
Do you realize how thin your evidence is here? You have third party information that somenone who's name is mentioned in a two year old story has talked to someone on the phone lately.
This is probably a good indication that Shannon Boyd is alive. But what's that got to do with DNAPrint being alive?
Maybe this Shannon Boyd could run a forensic test on DNAPrint? Maybe come up with some clues?
Ahhhh, but! The question to be addressed is not one of whether or not they will take your money for a q-tip, and a little zip-lock bag. The question which has been raised is whether or not the lab is still active.
Let us know how the test turns out. Have you ever read the book "Kingsblood Royal" by Sinclair Lewis? Although written about sixty years ago, it is absolutely pertinent to the questions raised by tests of this sort. It should be required reading for anyone contemplating taking one of these tests.
Here is a link to a Google finance board where I think he finally got the wind knocked out his sails. This involves a report from someone who actually bothered to go visit DNAPrint. Some of the pictures taken have already popped up on this forum.
See below:
http://finance.google.com/group/google.finance.717321/t/3199afac0eba63de
No Sam, that's not what we want either. I'm looking for something more along the lines of:
Is DNAPrint Genomics, I mean this particular company, still in business?
I can't find any indication that it is.
bigdrive:
I'm going to disagree with you. I'm not sure if Sam was digging at me or complimenting me, but I will express my thought here.
If we all act altruistically, it gives these forums some value. Sure, there is room for some humor and maybe even sarcasm, but please don't post B.S.
Perhaps I'm viewed as a "basher" here, but that is certainly not my intention. I'm just putting up my observations of this company and asking for feedback. I realize my contributions have not been positive regarding the company itself, but again, I must stress that they are only my observations. I invite someone to add something I don't know.
I would love as much as anyone to buy this at .0004 and someday walk away with a "thousand bagger".
I don't think it is really constructive to post things like that.
We are all here looking for facts about DNAPrint. If they are favorable, or unfavorable, so be it. But please, no fiction. Because unless you post supporting evidence, that is exactly what it is.
That is worrisome. If this company has spent the income from the sale of tests, and owes it's customers the actual results, this is a liability which probably does not show properly on the books.
But then again, who knows? The company is no longer producing financial statements.
iclone:
I'm not sure if you saw this post from DG:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=34200663
Apparently you are not the only one experiencing problems with receiving results. In the referenced post, DG misinterprets this as a good thing. However, in my view, it only seems to reinforce the fact that the lab is no longer active.
Are these tests paid for in advance?
There was a question raised about whether or not this company was still actively engaged in business. So far all the evidence seems to be that they have closed down. No one seems to be able to come up with any thing to refute this. Hence, the lack of postings I guess.
I wonder if Brel International has had any luck leasing that space at 1621 West University Parkway?
http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc1/mclass55/sign_at_entrance_with_space_availab.jpg
Uh, Oh.
Share price is below .0004. dgplexus better hurry up and get back to buying.
"23andMe under scrutiny:"
I'm not sure if this is good or bad, in one way 23andMe is a competitor. But them again this may indicate that govt. is going to begin looking at this industry a little harder. It seems they may be worried that there is some kind of "scam" factor involved.
The more pressing issue for potential investors here remains finding some evidence that this company hasn't ceased doing business.
Thanks Sam, I appreciate that information.
But more to the point - I am looking for evidence that this particular company ie; DNAPrint Genomics, is still actively engaged in business. Something from the executives in charge. An SEC filing, letter to shareholders, cars parked in the parking lot. You know... Something?
Sam: I appreciate what you are saying. I'm here because I was solicited to buy into this stock by a mutual acquaintance of ours. I did my DD, and reported back to that individual, and was rewarded with a blowtorch in my face. You can go look at the Google Finance boards and check it out if you like. Look under Fannie Mae and DNAPrint Genomics.
I know I am new here, and I fully respect those who have been here for a long time. Review my posts... I am offering some things to you that a few of us have found out, and discussed over there, and I am asking questions that maybe can fill in some of the gaps in my understanding. I am not trying to trash this stock or the company itself, I'm just reporting what I see.
Merry Christmas to all. I hope the administrators can grant us all some leeway in the Holiday season and not delete these posts!
You are correct. I guess I am "decimally challenged".
There would not be much of a point in going through the motions just to get it to one cent.
Here's another question. If they do a reverse split does the shares authorized number change accordingly, or will that remain static, allowing them to issue new shares?
What are the odds that a company that no longer bothers to file financials will go through with a reverse split? It would take 2500 to 1 to even get back to one cent. Seriously - this is a question, not a bash attempt.
Dan:
You posted: "The trademark only pertains to the name. Not the product, the intellectual property, or the relationships with customers. Look it up. Nobody should talk about trademarks and be ignorant of this basic consideration. If one trademark is abandoned, and another company happens to trademark that name, it is simple enough to just trademark a new name for the thing. Some trademarks are critical, of course, like "Coca Cola." That's quite different from the case of DNAWitness."
Isn't it at least a little bit disturbing that this compnay seems, at best, to be indifferent about protecting the DNAWitness trademark?
And isn't it a even a little bit worrisome that two of the officers in association with a third party are applying for a patent on a product called DNAWitness, on behalf of themselves. Not DNAPrint Genomics. The intellectual product belongs to you. The shareholders. I'm not saying these guys are walking out the back door with the intellectual property, not at all. But don't they at least owe the shareholders an answer as to what they are up to? Why aren't they communicating with the shareholders?
I'm not bashing anything. I'm just pointing out things that are in the public domain, that seem a little worrisome.
You are missing the whole point - again.
The patent application acknowledges intellectual property owned by among many others, DNAPrint. But it is a patent application for a product to be called DNAWitness, and it has not been filed on behalf of DNAPrint. It has been filed on behalf of three individuals, two of whom happen to be it's officers, and a third party.
The executives who are in charge should be defending their trademarks. They should be defending DNAPrint's (your) "intellectual property". I'm not saying anyone is doing anything wrong, far from it. I think what they are doing is completely above board, and perfectly legal. But it may not be completely in line with shareholder's interest.
I don't think shareholders are paying enough attention to what is going on with this company. You deserve answers from these guys. You deserve to know that they are acting in your interests, and not carrying the intellectual property out the back door.
Believe it or not, despite the severe abuse you heap onto the poor guy, UkiwiS is trying to do you a favor.
I'm not bashing here, OK. I'm pointing out a clue that you interpret to be good news, and I'm offering an alternative view. Not "bashing" mind you. Just an alternative view.
You said: "When I spoke with DNA Profiles of America, on the phone today, they indicated that there is a substantial backlog of tests to be processed."
These guys (distributors) are selling the kits, but the lab is behind in processing them. Or maybe the lab isn't processing anything?
Daniel; you are the big Kahuna in this company. You need to call Gomez or Gabriel onto the carpet and get some answers. At least a "letter to shareholders". Something, anything.
Speaking of intellectual property. Here is a situation which I would think a major shareholder would have the power to get cleared up.
Visit this link to the US patent and trademark office:
http://www.uspto.gov/index.html#
Click "Trademarks" on the left side.
Then click on the third item down. "Search TM database (TESS)"
Then click "New User Search Form (Basic).
Now enter DNAWitness under "Search Term". You will see that this trademark has been abandoned by DNAPrint Genomics.
OK fine.
Now for the interesting part.
Click on the following link.
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=dnawitness&OS=dnawitness&RS=dnawitness
This appears to be an application to patent a new DNAWitness product, to be held by Gabriel, Frudakis, and a Matthew Thomas.
Is there any possibility that these guys are trying to move on with DNAWitness for themselves, leaving DNAG, and it's equity and debt holders behind? If I was a major shareholder, I would be all over this.
This "substantial backlog" wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that DNAPrint seems to have ceased doing business would it? No lab... No tests.
What if these people start wanting their money back?
If you are talking about DNAG, I don't think it even qualifies as a penny stock.
And they do not seem to be actively engaged in business anymore.
I'm not "bashing" this stock, or trying to force "BK" give me break. That is entirely up to the creditors. My questions are reasonable for a forum discussing stocks.
I'm fascinated by the fact that long time shareholders are not worried that this company has produced no financial data in ten months. This company has provided no indication that it is even still actively engaged in any revenue producing activities.
There is one poster here who seems to be far and away the largest shareholder in this company, owning more shares by a large margin than any of the officers. He has the power to have these answers provided, and yet he does not excersise this power? Or maybe he has gotten some answers, but the information is not conforming to the standards which you all seem to want this board to adhere to. (Fuzzy good news only. No "bashing").
You are shareholders. Share price is four ten thousandths of a cent! You deserve answers. Don't satisfy yourselves with news storys that may have something to do with products similar to what this company produced, or postings about genetics and biology that are far more fitting to a genetic science forum than a stockholder's forum.
Revenue information. Forward looking guidance. Quarterly reports. Where are they?
There is no indication whatsoever that this company's products are, or will be involved in the investigation of this crime. In fact, it's hard to find an indication that this company is even producing products anymore.
There is something a little disturbing about people who use these high profile tragedies to try to pump share price of a stock they own.
Find some business and economic reasons to support or not support this stock. But, let's leave these poor families alone.
DG:
Thank you for the information on DNAPrint's distributors. It is clear that you have done your homework.
Why isn't this information available directly from the company?
Thank's for the links Sam. You did point out the "recreational" aspect of these tests when you first posted Amanda Sarata's report. Sorry for missing that.
I can see the market for this type of testing. It might actually be far more lucrative than forensic testing when you think about it.
I read your links and learned at lot, and I'm thinking about putting a chunk of money into genetics. But I'm not sure DNAG is the right vehicle. I still can't find any direct evidence that DNAPrint Genomics is still an active concern.
Frog, I'm not sure what you mean. I was quoting from this article, which Sam1933 was kind enough to point me to.
http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RS22830_20080312.pdf
I didn't have to pay to see it. I've got a lot of curiosity about DNAG as it has been heavily touted as an extremely undervalued stock. But, I'm not curious enough to buy any reports.
Everything that my own research has managed to dig up makes me wonder whether or not this company is still a going concern. It kind of looks like it may not be. I'm also disturbed by the fact that it looks like they have been paying obligations by issuing shares, rather than debt. These are just some of the concerns I have.
Thank you Sam. But I do also notice that there is this sentence just preceding the section that you pasted from this document, the part you put in bold letters where DNAPrint is mentioned. It might have been helpful if you had included this sentence, and saved me the trouble.
"These tests are termed “recreational” in deference to and in contrast with genetic tests performed for health or forensic purposes."
The research I had already done led me to the conclusion that the DNAWitness product does not qualify as a forensic tool. Hence it was a little bit of a stretch to have trumpeted the case of that poor Arkansas woman as somehow being news for DNAG shareholders.
I'm still looking for some kind of current information that would indicate this company continues to engage in activities that generate revenue. (Besides share dilution).
I did my DD, thank you. And I also came up with debt of roughly $11,000,000 that looks like it is senior to common shares.
I understand from some other investors that this is a highly undervalued stock at it's current price.
But I can't find any evidence that this company is even actively engaged in business anymore. I'm just asking someone for help to point out what I might be missing.
Can some one point out any evidence that this company is still active, or is doing absolutely anything to generate a revenue stream? According to their last two 8K filings they have a lot of debt that would appear to be senior to common shares.
News storys involving something they might have had something to do with don't count.
Is there any information available about revenues for this company and it's products? I mean are they actually selling anything right now? And collecting revenue from the sale? I think that would be a more valid issue for investors than an arguement about whether their product was or was not used to solve this particular murder.
My old man was in a rant last night about people using this tragedy as an excuse to pump this stock. I guess I have to agree with him that it is, at a minimum, kind of tasteless.
George Jr.
Here is why I like Ford. So far government terms for receiving money have been rather onerous for common share price. GM and Chrysler will probably dip in immediately and that will be bad news for GM shareholders and Cerebrus.
If Ford can hold out, and not have to dip in, I'm thinking there could be a very real chance that Ford will emerge as the #1 US automaker, and the only one free from government meddling in their product line.