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.
"finally very close to the finish line."? Huh? What "finish line"?
They don't have a single product/process that I'm aware of that's even remotely, not even a far distant chance IMO, from being close to even "submitting" something to the FDA?
They've not even completed a phase III trial, nor to they appear to have a phase III trial even progressing right now. not one? So what would be the "finish line"? Further, even if something were to ever reach "submission" to FDA, it by no means = approval.
Have no idea what the "finish line" would be, or is even supposed to mean? They are cash poor, 3 total employees left, and nothing I'm aware of even remotely close to being ready to present to the FDA?
Is there a 10-K that could be cited that would indicate this "finish line" is "close"?
Look at a "typical" (IMO) phase III "stem cell" trial from an enormously successful company, Baxter, a true "world leader" in healthcare, bio-tech, and medical technology with about 60 THOUSAND employees and easily a $billion dollars at their disposal. They list 4 (four) years to even expect "final data" on their stem cell, phase III trial. Not an FDA "submission", but just the conclusion of the trial and "final data".
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01508910
Enrollment: 291
Study Start Date: April 2012
Estimated Study Completion Date: June 2016
Estimated Primary Completion Date: June 2016 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)
That, IMO is "typical" and being done by a world leader, who obviously knows what they are doing, and has an enormous, R&D budget and enormous staff or highest caliber research scientists and entire departments of nothing but FDA regulatory specialists. 4 yrs to "final data" is what they are stating.
That's what I see and IMO, BHRT is not even close to any "finish line" for anything?
Volume looks to be drying up. Going on a week plus now, and never came close to breaking back over 50 DMA, despite the PR barrage.
It's in a solid downtrend now according to the chart.
IMO, one major sell order of "size" or shorting campaing from an "ASHER" type or similar (a lot of convertible shares sitting out there IMO = short at some point in future), or some insider type, or warrant holder or whatever selling a chunk to make some money- and it'll have some more 10%, 15% or 15% plus down days like we saw fairly recently.
Right now, it's just the broker/dealers working with someone still IMO- to hold the price here as I see it trade daily. Everyday, it's spent most of the day down, then right at close, they've opened up the spread and closed it out to look "flat for the day" on one, or a few, tiny buy order. That buy could very well be "them", some broker house, "walking it back up" to suit their own needs. It's net selling everyday IMO from what I've seen.
At some point here, I think it heads for the 200 DMA area of about 2 cents. The "PRs" recently, have been blasted out nonstop, nearly some "announcement" every few days, seems to have lost its ability to pump the price up IMO. "PR fatigue" is how I see it.
Not to mention the "other" hype going on, all day, every trading day for over a week now- has had zero effect to move it, IMO.
Wow!, Gee ! "The six month data has far exceeded our expectations."
Want me to link to every "PR", oh, lets say going back 4 yrs to shorten the list- that says something nearly identical to that?
PR that is loaded with "far exceeded" or a favorite word, "breakthrough" or similar?
Got an entire link list built- it was getting so hard to keep track of um. IMO, for a 3 cent, penny stock- they put out more "PR" than probably Apple for example. I can probably count the PR releases from someone like Apple or the company Facebook for example- and be able to prove, IMO, that BHRT puts out at least, if not more "PR" releases.
The big "news" today- doesn't seem to be moving the ole stock price too much? Sometimes, you just wear out the "PR" machine IMO. Further, vague statements like ""The six month data has far exceeded our expectations." don't do much for me personally anyways. What were the "expectations" in the first place as compared to what current, peer reviewed research "norms" and then what scientific methods were used to figure out they "far exceeded" these "expectations" and so forth?
It doesn't say or mean much IMO as stated. Just more "PR" IMO. Make of it what you want. If you find it "exciting" or whatever- more power to you. Where's the phase III "trial(s)" as in multiple that we never hear about anymore? A 5 person, phase I in Mexico? What's the point IMO, when your phase III has gone nowhere? What's this phase I supposed to amount to now? You've gone backwards IMO. If you can't "fund" what you have on your plate now, that was far advanced of this 5 person phase I, then what is it going to cause to happen supposedly?
Buy, sell, hold, get excited, whatever one wants. To me, does nothing for me. Not "exited" in the slightest. Read so many similar "Pr's" with similar wording that went nowhere later on. I'd be more interested/concerned about the form 14, SEC proxy filing that somehow never made it on the old, big "PR" circuit. Kinda odd IMO, the "selective PR" thing. You double your outstanding share count, and the common holder have no say or vote in it, and it receives zero "PR" or big announcement? But every other trivial (IMO) "event" like someone getting and "award" or giving a "talk" is blasted out, all over every PR outlet you can find? Yeah. OK. Again, get excited if one wants. Good luck.
Or NO "Partnership or reverse merger???" perhaps?
Lets see, a phase II/III trial has sat for 4 yrs now and never attracted a "partner" and don't even know what a "reverse merger" is supposed to be or mean?
But years of FDA, actual inside the U.S. "trials" did nothing for them, and amounted to nothing- except of course, massive share dilution and a collapsing stock price, essentially straight down to 3 cents.
But now, now today , suddenly, a 5 person "trial", done in Mexico is suddenly, as has been stated probably 500 times, going to cause "something big" to happen?
Why IMO? Why now? What's different now than last yr, other than more shares being out, twice as many for the most part- 190 million to now 460 million plus?
I don't see a single fact, or material event or "cause" now, that's any different than any number, numerous numbers of "PR" and similar I can dig up, going back over 4 yrs, that never caused these "claims" and conjecture and IMO pure "hype" to ever materialize.
Not seeing it. That's my opinion. Just dreaming and conjecture based on nothing of substance really IMO. If a phase III, that was actually a legit, FDA regulated, inside the U.S. trails didn't "do it" for um, what's going back to square on in Mexico, with 5 people, no cash essentially, no employees really left (3 total) and more share diluted than ever, going to cause "it" to happen now? Don't think so IMO.
IMO, by the time the 10-Q comes out, just read page 1 and look at the share count and figure out the dilution, then look for the cash balance entry. That's about it, IMO.
Totallycomfused- wow is all I can say. Thanks for sharing the info- it's totally understandable IMO to want to limit what info is put out there.
I have no reason IMO, to doubt that you're "for real". Why would someone suffering COPD, looking for a solution, go to all the trouble to create all this pretty detailed info and post it IMO? Plus it appears to have enough details to be pretty easily verifiable IMO.
I'll have to read it several more times. Probably want to do some more research on my own too- but it's some pretty "amazing" stuff said in there IMHO, to say the least.
My opinions only, and only related to reading what totallycomfused has stated. It's for our own discussion and not meant to make anyone buy, sell, hold a stock or influence anything they think about any company or stock. It's opinions only and information only as far as I'm concerned. Do your own due diligence and make of the discussion/info whatever you want. My thoughts or statements are mine only and not intended to influence anyone else. Read um or ignore them or do with them what you want. Opinions/musings/observations only- nothing more.
And here's the FACT based "update":
Latest 10-K, PAGE 2:
"We are seeking to secure sufficient funds to reinitiate enrollment in the MARVEL and REGEN trials. If we successfully secure such funds, we intend to re-engage a contract research organization, or CRO, investigators and certain suppliers to advance such trials.
"
"Reinitiate enrollment" in plain English, means that presently, "enrollment" is NOT going on. No more complicated than that.
The word "reinitiate" means to "re-start" something that is presently stopped.
That, is the factual "update".
"
Funding will be made available if not already..."?? Same 10-K, they have $46 THOUSAND total dollars left to their name, end of 2013. They added a supplement to the 10-K prior to release that brought their cash to a grand total of about $211K dollars.
That doesn't even cover maybe one month's, 2 month's tops- "burn rate" and spending. No more complicated than that. They are essentially "cash broke" on any given month, any given time period. There is zero proof of some "financing deal" or whatever- other than dumping shares off in enormously dilutive deals to Asher and their ilk or similar- and the cash "trickles in", in amounts to keep the company limping along in one to two month or so intervals.
That's what the 10-Q's and 10-K's say- as they state the qtr to qtr cash balance situation- and it's dismal at best, each time, for over 2 yrs. Life support dismal- and their own mgt comments and auditor "going concerns" statements, among other statements in the 10-K or 10-Q's essentially say/admit that.
Those are the facts IMO, not opinions or "blog talk" or whatever- just reading the SEC docs. Nothing else is needed IMO, if one wants to know the true condition of the company.
"Tomorrow BioHeart presents" Yaaaawn.
A "phase I" of 5 people in Mexico,a big whoop IMO.
Hey, how bout those "lost", big ole phase II and phase III "trials" that just seem to have vanished?
Any updates on those? You know, MARVEL for instance, gone nowhere in what, like 4 plus yrs now?
Any mention of MIRROR- other than the "barely mention" in the latest 10-K?
5 people, phase I, outside U.S. at some facility in "Mexico"- sorry, but for me personally, doesn't do a thing. Nothing. That's my opinion. Phase I means what, another 5 yrs to as much as 7 to 10 yrs maybe to complete the phase II and then phase III, if, the big "if" they even attempt to get it through the FDA gauntlet?
That's my 2 cent opinion. Just another "PR" event IMO. That's about it, the way I see it.
"I have never seen a .03 stock that was on the NASDAQ before"?? Huh? What?
That's like stating that being DELISTED is some "badge of honor" or something? It's a sign of a failing company. You don't get delisted cause things are "going great", that's for certain.
Nearly ever penny stock in existence (except for total, criminal level sham/scams using empty shell corps and similar)- every one that ends up on the OTCBB or "pinks" was once a "listed company".
BHRT barely lasted 1 yr on the NASDAQ. They were in horrible financial condition, weak financial condition even when they went public- in one of the biggest "bust" IPO's in at least modern stock market history.
http://venturebeat.com/2008/02/19/three-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust-bioheart-makes-it-across-the-ipo-goal-line-but-with-little-to-show-for-its-struggles/
http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2009/02/26/393349/160467/en/Bioheart-Inc-Receives-Notice-of-Delisting-From-The-NASDAQ-Capital-Market.html
http://venturebeat.com/2007/10/12/i-told-you-so-eat-your-bioheart-out/#comments
"always SOARS on a FINACIAL deal"?? (it's financial, spelling) Huh?
Pull up any chart- 2 yr, 3 yr, 5 yr??
The stock is STRAIGHT DOWN to sub basement level (sub 3 CENTS) since one of the worst IPO's in stock market history.
The stock has never "soared", ever IMO? It's down over 99% from the IPO date.
" A/S increase has had minimum effect on the PPS "?? The stock has been diluted from over $1 dollar a share, even several dollars a share to THREE CENTS. It was delisted off the NASDAQ after only about 1 yr of trading- sent packing the OTCBB.
Don't know what info you're talking about or what chart you read or look at?
Tomas has been in the driver's seat since what, about 2010- over 4 yrs now I believe? The stock price is STRAIGHT DOWN from the time when he took over. I'd need to look at a chart- but I think it was at least 50 or 60 cents, if not more, when he took command. And under his watch, they've never secured a "major financing" deal that I'm aware of in the past 4 yrs or so? They've only massively diluted and used some of the worst "financing" and "financing of last resort" a company can use while on his watch- diluting shares from about 20 million shares in 2010 approx, to now over 460 million as of that form 14 just filed.
That's facts, versus pure speculation, conjecture, etc IMO.
"Biotech Investing for Beginners " IN THE REAL WORLD.
CASH and lots of it. Simple as that. No CASH, no existy anymore. What, use monopoly money? Read the latest balance sheet in the 10-K.
Or here, read this: Latest 10-K, PAGE 25 and 26-
"
Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Need for Additional Financing
We will need to secure additional financing in 2014 in order to continue to finance our operations. If we are unable to secure additional financing on acceptable terms, or at all, we may be forced to curtail or cease our operations.
As of March 24, 2014, we had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $211,632.80 and a working capital deficit of approximately $13.4 million. As such, our existing cash resources are insufficient to finance even our immediate operations. Accordingly, we will need to secure additional sources of capital to develop our business and product candidates as planned. We are seeking substantial additional financing through public and/or private financing, which may include equity and/or debt financings, research grants and through other arrangements, including collaborative arrangements. As part of such efforts, we may seek loans from certain of our executive officers, directors and/or current shareholders. We may also seek to satisfy some of our obligations to the guarantors of our loan with Seaside National Bank & Trust, or the Guarantors, through the issuance of various forms of securities or debt on negotiated terms. However, financing and/or alternative arrangements with the Guarantors may not be available when we need it, or may not be available on acceptable terms.
If we are unable to secure additional financing in the near term, we may be forced to:
· curtail or abandon our existing business plan;
· reduce our headcount; (they only have THREE people left?)
· default on our debt obligations;
· file for bankruptcy;
· seek to sell some or all of our assets; and/or
· cease our operations.
If we are forced to take any of these steps, any investment in our common stock may be worthless.
Our ability to obtain additional debt financing and/or alternative arrangements, with the Guarantors or otherwise, may be limited by the amount of, terms and restrictions of our then current debt. For instance, we do not anticipate repaying our Northstar loan (described below) until its scheduled maturity. Accordingly, until such time,
we will generally be restricted from, among other things, incurring additional indebtedness or liens, with limited exceptions. See “We have a substantial amount of debt...” Additional debt financing, if available, may involve restrictive covenants that limit or further limit our operating and financial flexibility and prohibit us from making distributions to shareholders.
If we raise additional capital and/or secure alternative arrangements, with the Guarantors or otherwise, by issuing equity, equity-related or convertible securities, the economic, voting and other rights of our existing shareholders may be diluted, and those newly issued securities may be issued at prices that are a significant discount to current and/or then prevailing market prices. In addition, any such newly issued securities may have rights superior to those of our common stock. If we obtain additional capital through collaborative arrangements, we may be required to relinquish greater rights to our technologies or product candidates than we might otherwise have or become subject to restrictive covenants that may affect our business.
Our independent registered public accounting firm has expressed substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern."
"Going concern" is the "nice" way of saying BANKRUPTCY and NO CASH to payee offa thee ole debts.
"DID YOU GUYS SEE THIS" (dated March 7th)?? A little "old news" isn't it?
"A blog"? Yeah. OK. Is there any cash or "investors" or non-dilutive, non "toxic" floorless convertible "financing" or similar listed in the 10-K or any other SEC filed document or similar?
Funny, the ole "blog" forgot to mention the 2 BILLION share allocation increase they must have known was coming IMO? How'd that little tid-bit of "kinda important" info get left out? How?
If not in a SEC doc, IMO, it means nothing. No more complicated than that. A "blog" that's not even hosted on the official company web site. And it's "vague" at best IMO. I can link to PR's going back 4 or 5 yrs or more- that say essentially, near word for word, those exact same statements about, "a rather large interest in the sector of regenerative medicine, as well as institutional investors." blah, blah, blah. Nothing new being "claimed". Old saying, "show me the money".
I keep a "link list" now, I've found so many.
"Blog" IMO = big whoop about nothing.
If it gets one "excited", or trips their trigger or whatever, best of luck to um.
Good luck and happy trading.
No longer under patent: "Bioheart’s lead product candidate is MyoCell®,...."
10-K, PAGE 30:
"Our product candidates may never be commercialized due to unacceptable side effects and increased mortality that may be associated with such product candidates.
Possible side effects of our product candidates may be serious and life-threatening. A number of participants in our clinical trials of MyoCell have experienced serious adverse events potentially attributable to MyoCell, including six patient deaths and 18 patients experiencing irregular heartbeats. A serious adverse event is generally an event that results in significant medical consequences, such as hospitalization, disability or death, "
Page 40:
"We hold limited patent rights in our product candidates. Our MyoCath product candidate is protected by a patent, expiring in September 2017, in which we have an irrevocable co-exclusive license. Our MyoCell product candidate is no longer protected by patents, which means that competitors will be free to sell products that incorporate the same or similar technologies that are used in MyoCell without infringing our patent rights. As a result, MyoCell, if approved for use, may be vulnerable to competition in the form of products that use the same or similar technologies. "
"angel investors" DO NOT invest in companies that have already gone public.
When/how is Adipocell going to "make money" in "early October"? Can you please supply links to the 10-K or a PR or similar stating that? Some here must not have seen or read that news release.
Thank you.
"Well, I have stage 4 emphysema/copd, so I have researched this over the last years. IMO, you are completely correct about all your assumptions. I actually received an email from the the company with a price quote. "
Firstly, very sorry to hear of your condition. Wishing you the best outcome.
Would find it fascinating to see the body of that email if you can cut n paste it. Would like to read the wording and see how exactly it's stated and so forth.
My personal opinion, and that's all it is, "my opinion" only- is anyone (hospital, clinic, academic researcher, whatever) that states something is a "study" or "trial" or whatever, and then wants to charge a "patient" $1000's or $10's of thousands of dollars to "participate"? Personally, and that is ME only, I'd run, not even walk, to get away from it, again in my opinion. That's just my opinion only.
All "normal", generally accepted practices that I've ever read or heard about or seen reported in "trial" recruiting "notices" (journals, magazines, television, academia, etc) say the "patients" is/will get some sort of "reimbursement" to be a participant- usually some basic fee/rate plus travel expenses, etc. It is not uncommon for cancer treatment "trial" participants to receive "treatments" in which each bag of the drug costs over $5000 a bag, for example, and the trial "patient" is not charged one dime to be "in the trial" and participate in the research.
There are famous stories, of people who, for example, paid their living expenses while in college via being "trial subjects"- just signing up for every research "trial" in which they met the requirements and were thus paid to participate. (will find the link to one when I can- one guy participated in like 100's of drug trials, it was in a very well respected technology mag I read regularly).
Here is a link to the 60 minutes piece specifically on "stem cells" being offered/done "outside U.S." in hospitals or "clinics" or by "researchers" who promised, near "miracle" supposed "cures" and/or "treatments" that were way outside the bounds of FDA approved processes/drugs and/or generally accepted current science and peer reviewed methods. They have a top Duke University, world class known researcher in the interview, she appears several times- in her words she states her estimate is is minimum 10 to 12 yrs away from "any" actual approved, "safe" treatment involving stem cells and the 60 minutes piece was done in 2012. So that'd be 2022 or later IMO?
The 60 minutes story, if you've never watched it- 60 minutes being one of the still, most respected "investigative journalism" organizations in the world:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/stem-cell-fraud-a-60-minutes-investigation-26-08-2012/
Read the article below it too, it's 5 pages I think, very good info IMO.
Man again, totally sorry to hear about your condition and situation. Be careful IMO. It's easy to become a bigger victim out of desperation and hoping for a cure or "treatment". I've dealt with several family member's w/ bad cancers (fatal in the end) and several other diseases- I similarly, scoured and researched and read volumes on everything I could find on their conditions. So I know how that works.
Some Hollywood cases are real well documented and famous 1) Because they have a lot of money to spend for a supposed "cure/treatment" and 2) They are a few hours drive from the Mexican border and/or travel expenses to them are nothing, as in even using private jets and so forth to rapidly get to where they need to go outside U.S. borders. Steve McQueen, Mexico cancer "treatment" being one well known, well documented case:
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Cancer/laetrile.html
"During 1980, movie star Steve McQueen attracted considerable attention when he was treated with Laetrile at another Mexican clinic under the supervision of William D. Kelley, a dentist who had been delicensed by the State of Texas after several brushes with state and federal law enforcement authorities. Although McQueen gave a glowing report when he began his treatment, he died shortly afterward."
Here is a link, just as an example, to "Stem cell" studies and research taking place in the Philippines, even they are having trouble with FDA type "regulatory" problems per their govt own standards- meaning doctors/clinics charging for unapproved "trials", etc
http://www.philstar.com/science-and-technology/2013/08/01/1035761/4-medical-groups-stem-cell-therapy-still-clinical-trial
"charging exorbitant fees for these procedures which they said are supposed to be under “clinical trial.”" and it also states,
""“In clinical trial, it is unethical to charge patients for these unproven indications. They (the patients) are actually the ones who should be compensated because they are part (of an experiment),” he added." (govt. physician regulatory person speaking in Philippines)
Here is a statement from a body/group (stacked with M.D.'s and Ph.D. researchers on their stated roster) specifically who deals with stem cells, specifically mentioning "Autologous" stem cells- they discuss "commercial" aspects of "unproven treatments", etc . Very interesting read IMO.
http://www.isscr.org/home/about-us/news-press-releases/2013/2013/09/12/isscr-statement-of-delivery-of-unproven-autologous-cell-based-interventions-to-patients
Here is their quote:
"Despite known risks, the many uncertainties, and the absence of scientific evidence supporting efficacy, some clinics and companies are offering unproven ACBIs to patients for a wide range of diseases and injuries. Many of these “clinics” charge substantial fees to patients, and operate in jurisdictions that have little oversight of medical practice. "
They also specifically discuss the words "for profit" and "ethics" in a paragraph, same article linked above.
Further quoting from them:
"The ISSCR condemns the administration of unproven stem cells or their direct derivatives to a large series of patients outside of clinical trials, particularly when patients are charged for such services."
Those are just some examples of things I've read. Again, one can make of them what they want. My opinions only- only there for discussion in reply to a specific statement about a COPD person who said they were "quoted fees" to participate in a "trial/study" type of "treatment" in Mexico. Do ones own due diligence, research- whatever. N
Never buy, sell, trade stock or form any medical or other opinions, or make a medical decision without one's own physician being involved, and especially based on anything I say or state. It's my information only- for discussion purposes only, linked only to stories, or for example the 60 minutes TV piece that I watched for myself, and myself only. I share the links to those investigative pieces or newspaper published or similar "journalism" pieces because they may be of interest to people who follow this field of medical research and companies involved therein. Do whatever one self wants to do with the information.
Now that - I found very interesting reading. Here is why I personally find it highly relevant potentially:
A personal (what's the word?) I guess "concern/potential problem" I've seen, IMO of the BHRT "trials" is they rely on a large degree it appears, on something like a "walking distance" test as the measure of outcome.
My personal feeling, it that's a tough "science" to use/prove perhaps. Whether you got the real deal, or even in a blinded, placebo study- and you got the placebo- my opinion is it would be hard to get real, confirmable outcomes. Here's why IMO- if you stand someone up (placebo or the real deal injection) and you give um a "test" that involves personal motivation- as in saying, "try and walk as far as you possibly can", the placebo effect can be huge IMO.
It's like a injured vet, or when I used to compete in sports- track, cross country, etc. When you're pushed, really motivated- it's amazing, stunning even, sometimes how much more you can go beyond your limit. When running alone, I could do a time of X, and thought I'd just nearly killed myself and pushed the limit. Put in a race situation, with a competitor running right at your side the entire way, you suddenly could run and maintain their pace, and then, on a good day, kick the end and beat um, and beat your own best time far beyond what you'd ever done previously. You know the stories- the father lifting the back end of the car up a few inches, when his kid is pinned underneath, or a combat soldier going waaaay beyond human capacity in the heat of battle.
The interest in that article you site- what I've more been looking for- is they're using things like "imaging"- they're actually going in, looking at the heart, blood flow rates, scar thickness, whether it pumps more again, etc. Very tangible, emperical, lab type measurements that can be quantified (and as science needs- independently repeated/verified by another, totally separate lab/team facility)- and the patient can't "bias" it or influence it via motivation, personal drive, trying harder, the will to walk farther- in other words, the placebo effect is probably effectively been controlled now perhaps. Very interesting.
I noted they're using some other cell/tech name, "mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs)" - don't personally know the details on what those are specifically yet. Will look them up for sure.
Good article. Very interesting. I like the imaging, quantifiable measurement stuff- I think that's a big plus IMO. Walk testing or similar has always rubbed me wrong a bit- just think it's too easy to have a placebo effect, whether you're in the control arm, or the real injection. The mind is an amazing thing- if you want to "get better" or feel better, you often will- especially when you know you're being asked to perform.
That's my opinion. Interesting though. Nice.
P.S. Look at the pedigree on that study team- loaded with M.D.'s, Ph.D's etc- heavy academia med researcher types. That never hurts either, IMO.
"Concentrate on your strongest and get it to market ."
Couldn't have said it better myself. All my experience in high tech, business, watching stock and companies struggle, etc says:
When you're in tough time, tough going, when money is low, when you're facing all kinds of hurdles- you knuckle down and go back to your CORE COMPETENCY and narrow your focus to laser sharp.
Not, scatter shot all over heck. There are classic, classic text book cases (many used in MBA level courses, in Harvard biz review and similar texts used).
1) Starbucks- had been floundering. Mcdonald and many others stared selling decent coffee- started eating into their market. Starbucks, run by the ole "MBA" mgt, had gotten into selling freaking CD music and schlock and what not. Opened way too many stores and were canabalizing their own locations. They brought back the original founder and CEO, Shultz. He immediately- like a freaking blow torch went into slash and burn mode. Closed non performing stores or ones's too close to other key locations. Dumped a bunch of the schlock merchandizing. Went back to their original cup and logo design and then got focused back on COFFEE- their core biz. Coffee and the "atmosphere" of hanging out at their locations. The stock doubled in less than a few yrs and it's a profit, money making machine again- roaring successful
2) Apple of course- perhaps thee text book, most researched turn around in modern biz history. Literally almost lost the whole deal. They bring Jobs back. He goes right back to making the best, core tech, well designed, highly functional products ever made in their arena. He then goes after the music biz, then the phones, etc- the rest is history. A cash printing machine with probably more, cold, hard cash in the bank that many countries.
There's many more. But the point is well taken- you go back to your core, to what you know, BioHEART (Hearts), I thought was their deal/expertise. You narrow, you pick your best couple candidate products- you put everything you got into um, and go full bore, make it or break it IMO.
The last thing you do IMO, my experience is begin to lose focus, go scatter-shot, drift, throw things at the wall for the ole, "lets see what sticks", etc. That just smells to me, IMO only, of desperation. As in, you're out of ideas, besides being out of money. Not good in my humble opinion. If MIRROR or MARVEL doesn't advance and soon IMO, I'd say it's just gonna be dilution, dilution, dilution for as long as the show goes on- and then one day, "lights out". Down to 3 people- how much can they realistically, possibly really do IMO?
Do your own due diligence, That's my ole opinions and thought and mine only. Read um, flush um, whatever one wants. Don't buy, sell, hold or trade based on anything I say. Just my musings for my own interest and conversation with others who also like to follow stocks and trade and so forth.
"They also charge their trial subjects a rather large sum on money"
That is my understanding too- from things I've read and seen on the net. I believe you are more than likely correct IMO.
Thus, to call something a "clinical trial" in the classic sense of what most are familiar with- as in U.S. based trials, where it is quite common for the patient to be paid a compensation (basic fee, travel, etc) to be willing to be a participant, versus being charged a fee- well, many find that outside the "normal" bounds of what stands as typical "clinical trials" IMO.
My understanding, again, only my opinion from 3rd party sources/research (the 60 minutes piece being probably the most highly regarded, well known, highly viewed)- is that it's not unusual at all to be charged $10K, to maybe $20K a pop for a "treatment" and this, from my understanding would/could fall under the heading of being a "trial participant".
In other words, in the opinion of some, it's possibly being used as an attempt at a "money maker", versus true "research" in the classic sense and understanding- especially where it's medical and/or academia related.
Thus, I believe IMO, (my OPINION ONLY- not claiming to have hard facts regarding this particular trial or "study" or whatever one wants to call it)- but that the particular clinic/hospital (The one in Mexico and other latin/central american locations) and especially "stem cell" related "procedures/treatments/studies" - whatever term one wants to use, often do come with a fee to the "patient/study" participant, and it's cash on the barrel head from the things I read and viewed.
So, I believe you are more than likely correct IMO. It also dovetails with several, fairly recent "PR's" where they (BHRT), appear to be getting into the "medical tourism" stuff, where they're essentially doing procedures/treatments that can't be done on U.S. soil- so they're doing um in places like S. America, Central America, Mexico, etc- and again, cash on the barrel, and fairly large amounts of cash needed ($10K a pop, is numbers I've seen in patient video/testimials/complaints made on Youtube, the 60 minutes piece, etc). They appear to have set up, or at least partnered with several "group" - gotta find the PR, that says they run 5 or 6 "sub companies" or whatever- and they "arrange" for a person to be "linked" I guess to one of these foreign country "doctors" for all kinds of "treatments" (if that's what one wants to call them IMO).
When I saw those PR's and read up on that "group" - they look to be, IMO, nothing much more than a web site, a lot of low budget videos, a rented "suite" and then pretty vast "claims" IMO- of all kinds of "cures/treatments" for nearly every malady known to mankind. I watched some of the videos- some of the funniest stuff I've ever seen- honestly. The one dude sits behind this desk with an old radio style microphone and supposedly "interviews" the two guys (it says like arthritis today or something"- and he asks some real lame (my opinion) question- and the one dude will start answering- and says like literally 10 words of nothing, then they fade and go to the next question, wash, rinse repeat. Baldness, erectile dysfunction- it was really funny. Let me see if I can link to it here- and these are again, "partners" or something per some PR. Really weirdo-rama stuff IMHO (mine OPINION only).
Here it is- these guys. I'm sorry - but I just can't take it seriously IMO. It looks like a web site, a rented suite maybe, a few people and the name "GLOBAL" of course- just doesn't pass my smell test. That's MY OPINION ONLY.
http://www.bioheartinc.com/assets/press/Globalstemcell.pdf
http://www.stemcellsgroup.com/
Now- watch this video- it just cracked me up, but hey, maybe that's just me? This is I guess- one of their, I guess 5 or 6 "sub" companies? Regenstem. It's funny as heck IMO- baldness, ED, autism, COPD, MS- I mean, it'll cure anything on the planet I guess? Me personally- I'd be nervous about these guys working on my car or recommending a mechanic to me- but hey, that's just me and that's just my 2 cents only.
"The trials on the .gov website state COPD, and that it has January 2016 "
So what, is my opinion. The MARVEL trial- the big ole, "flagship", Myocell, phase II/III trial is listed their too - and guess what? It says that "final data" was to be "complete" as of Feb. 2014.
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00526253?term=bioheart&rank=1
That's MARVEL- and it's there and you know what, according to the 10-K it's gone/going nowhere. But says on the .gov site, "Estimated Primary Completion Date: February 2014 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)"
Also- read the language carefully- it's a "study" versus a "trial" - big, big difference. A "study" is the baby step, loooong before you ever enter a serious trial- phase I, phase II, phase III, etc. Years and yrs before anything can even remotely happen from a commercial stand point IMO. Again, it's a big whoop IMO. (open label, non randomized- it's a no biggie IMO)
Well, the MARVEL trial has gone nowhere since about 2010. So big whoop it's "listed" on the .gov site. Read the 10-K, that's what matters. Be looking for all these "studies" and "trials" in coming 10-Q's and 10-K's and see what it says then- as to their progression or whatever.
What's mostly being listed right now are "studies"- which don't mean a whole lot IMO. So, lets say it actually does complete in Jan 2016 or whatever date in 2016. Then what? You'd now need a phase I, phase II and then a phase III to be even remotely close to ever bring it to market as an actual FDA approved "treatment"- probably 5 more yrs at least. So, 2021?
How bout the phase III trials right now- the ones that appear to be going nowhere? Who cares about more "studies" and that they are "listed" on the .gov site? When you got 3 people, and little to no money- what difference does it make? They can't even fund the actual, fairly decent trial- that might actually have a shot at progressing to "maybe" getting in front of the FDA one day. So why scatter-shot across a bunch more stuff? Money is already tight- why blow more on stuff starting back at square one when you can't even move the "flagship" product out of the holding pattern?
Makes zero sense to me as business plan. My personal opinion- it's nearly all just about "PR" and putting out a lot of it. It's not new for them- I've read stuff going back to 2009, reams of "deals" and "studies" and "new this and that" and "this will mean big sales" and blah, blah, blah. None of it, for the most part- even still exists today- or even gets a passing mention. Just like MIRROR didn't even get a "barely mention" in the latest 10-K. That should concern people far more than some recent "PR" about some "study" in Mexico, IMO.
That's the way I see it.
It's not a 10-K, that's filed for the increase in allocated share announcement, a 10-K is the end of yr, SEC filing annual report.
What was filed was known as a form 14 (14C) I believe- a "proxy" filing.
Don't know about the claim it's had "zero" effect on the share price? The stock has been 5 days now under the 50 DMA, and hasn't come close to breaking it once. It's in a down trend and volume is decreasing, drying up.
3 days is nothing. Just wait till more dilution occurs. Give it a few months. The share count, just from the 10-K release date was 420 million; by the filing of the form 14, it was stated as 460 million. Shares are pouring out like water IMO. Claiming 3 days as a "data point" is a stretch IMO.
One day, of one major seller- like an AHSER needing to unload, or go short, and this will be at 2 cents so fast, one's head will spin off IMO. It's already touched as low as about 2.5 cents. It's 65 plus percent off the .08 high that was only about 6 weeks ago.
The price has not "gone up" the last three days. It's flat at best, and on down days has been on higher vol. It's known as "making lower highs" and "lower lows"- a downtrend. Vol is key too. Look at a close like today- the broker dealer just "walked it up" to make it look like an "even" close- it could have been a $200 order or whatever. When it goes down, it goes down in big vol swings- and the volume sky rockets.
A day like today, about 1 million shares at 3 cents, that's about $30K traded all day. That's like having qty-15 people trade $2K of stock each. It's noise level.
Give it time- the dilution is not abating IMO, and key people, IMO are heavily manipulating this stock (broker/dealers and most likely one or more "finance" houses who are holders of convertibles and/or warrants)- that's my opinion. 3 days- I wouldn't get all worked up. Give it time. It can be at 2 cents in a blink on this one, that's the historic norm. One "big boy" going short, or needing to unload and down it will go- there is very little buy support IMO. Just low vol right now. It's heading on 7 days or so, and hasn't made it back over the 50 DMA avg once- not a good sign IMO. And that's despite a barrage of PR blasts and all- hasn't budged it at all.
Give it time IMO.
"STUDY"?? Wow, big whoop IMO. And this is supposed to lead to what, while the ole MIRROR phase III has gone silent and MARVEL went dead in the water and on and on and on? (COPD, ortho stuff, ED, animal stuff of all things- how bout just toss the entire kitchen sink at it and see what sticks mode, that's it IMO)
A "study"- that means 5 yrs minimum to even remotely = anything. Probably 7 to 10 yrs more likely for ever reaching something like an FDA approval.
Whatever happened to the "HEART", as n BioHEART? Funny, all the heart "trials" that ever mattered have amounted to nothing and myocell isn't even on patent protection anymore.
Notice too, the "PR BARRAGE" doesn't do anything to the price lately? They, IMO, have worn out the PR "about something" campaign- to where it's basically noise IMHO. You eventually reach saturation IMO, and it just becomes too much- 3 people doing all this "stuff"? Really?
Read the COPD one today- as vague as can be as always and says practically nothing IMO.
For example, states "the study" done at some "time before"- but doesn't say how many people, etc
And now it's extremely carefully worded to say will enroll "up to 100 patients" That wording is classic IMO. If one has any engineering or mathematics or probability/stat background; here's what those words mean. It means if "the study" ends up having ONE patient or TWO or FIVE for example, then they've made a true statement- because it's greater than zero patients and under 100. So, literally having ONE patient in said "study" would make the PR true.
A more typical wording IMO, would be, "The study will enroll a minimum of 50 patients to as many as 100 patients maximum"- that IMO now means something.
Also, it's another Mexico , non FDA type "deal" using this non-profit, self created "group" (whatever you want to call them) called the ICMS. They have no govt. regulatory or other authority like the FDA to "approve" or otherwise commercialize a product in the U.S, that I am familiar with? In fact the FDA just audited them not that long ago- questioning some of their practices- here are links to the FDA audit.
http://www.cellmedicinesociety.org/attachments/415_FDA%20483%20-%20ICMS%20IRB%20-%2019%20June%202012%20(redacted).pdf
http://www.cellmedicinesociety.org/component/content/article/86-news/415-fda-audit-findings
http://www.cellmedicinesociety.org/component/content/article/414-fda-audit
Further, what's "funding' all these "studies" (what, like half a dozen now, in fields all over the map, and not the "heart")- and the end game is what? What is all this supposed to lead too, besides generating nice sounding "PR" IMO? You can't even fund your key trials, some sitting dead in the water now for going on 4, almost 5 yrs and your own documents state "funding" as the cause- so you head off of your core-focus into a smattering of all kinds of other undertakings? That's the business "plan"? Make zero sense to me, IMO. My opinion. Mine only. Does nothing for me- just see it as "PR" and stuff that will probably never be heard about in a year or so, like so, so many of their past "PR" big "announcements". That's the way I see it.
I can't even count how many "PR" that is in what, like two weeks- and the share price is sitting at 3 cents and below. Oh well IMO. Doesn't seem to be generating any real excitement I can see IMO. I think it's the "where's the beef" time. As in show the phase II/III, FDA trials advancing, or else- what's the end game here? That's what I'm seeing. Studies, they're everywhere and most never lead to, or ever amount to anything being "commercialized" or monetized- they need money, and sales and cash and they need it now, not 7 to 10 yrs from now or whatever. Again, that's my opinion.
PR on 2 BILLION share increase, SEC filing "proxy"- still haven't found or seen it yet? Can't see it anywhere? Did the PR ever come out?
Saw the PR about some "study" on COPD or something? That one made it right out? Kinda weird IMHO?
How come the "news" that the outstanding shares are going to essentially double to 2 BILLION didn't make it onto the ole "PR" circuit?
Wonder how come some "stuff" gets big PR, but others never make it on PR? Again, just weird IMHO?
I've looked all over- and if it wasn't for that pesky ole SEC filing site- I don't think that form 14, Proxy announcement (whatever it's called exactly) would have ever been seen IMO.
The Beaumont hospital SEC form 8 filing or whatever it was called - that one got a big ole PR too, and "tweets" and all kinds of "news". It was a ole SEC filing, correct? So what happened to this Form 14, 2 BILLION share announcement news? Seems kinda like something pretty important that the ole common shareholders would really wanna know about IMO. Just odd IMHO?
Oh well, that's my opinion. I was looking for a PR on that 2 BILLION share announcement - after reading all the stuff about how it "should" mean lots of great stuff and all. Just haven't found that PR though? Oh well, will keep watching for it I guess. The COPD "study"- boy, that PR sure got out there fast, eh? But the 2 BILLION share "news" just didn't make it I guess?
"BHRT Bioheart's leading product, MyoCell, is a .."
is no longer under patent protection.
Previous 10-K to this year's (filed 3/29/13, PAGE 16:
"Patents and Proprietary Rights
We hold limited patent rights in our product candidates. Our MyoCath product candidate is protected by a patent, expiring in September 2017, in which we have an irrevocable co-exclusive license. Our MyoCell product candidate is no longer protected by patents, which means that competitors will be free to sell products that incorporate the same or similar technologies that are used in MyoCell without infringing our patent rights. As a result, MyoCell, if approved for use, may be vulnerable to competition in the form of products that use the same or similar technologies. We have previously licenses certain patents and patent applications relating to our MyoCell product candidate. These licenses have all lapsed as of the date of this report, although we have had discussions with the relevant licensor regarding a potential reinstatement of our rights in such licenses."
"Bioheart has initiated this new study for COPD"-
BHRT "initiates" a lot of things in PR's, etc IMO. Read the last 5 yrs of "PRs" - that's my suggestion, start around 2008 and just read um all. Google is an amazing tool. I've read probably every last "announcement" and notice of a "study" or "breakthrough" or "partnership" or "term sheet" or whatever, going back to at least 2008 or so. And today- it's a 3 cent stock, near cash broke, essentially no sales, no products even close IMO to commercialization under an FDA approval, 3 employees left, at least qty-3 CEO's since 2008, most of the BOD from the IPO time period gone, and the stock from 2008 to today- diluted from maybe 20 million shares tops, to now 460 MILLION or more shares.
COPD "study"- big whoop IMHO. Doesn't do it for me. Any word on MIRROR? ANY? Yeah? Any word on "reinitiating" MARVEL trial- it needs "reintiation" cause it's "stopped" and gone/going nowhere. Any "news" on that? Yeah.
Most, if any, never lead or amount to anything. They got phase II/III "trials" going back 5 yrs, sitting "parked" going nowhere.
How long does one think a "study" in COPD is from "commercialization"- realistically? What, 5 yrs at the very least, 10 yrs or so would be more the FDA industry "norm" IMO.
SO what IMO. And what is going to pay for advancing this "study" if it ever even gets finished, let alone advances to anything?
Founded in 1999, NO KIDDING??
Wow, that's only the 8th time, I've read those words, VERBATIM, in less than what, 6 days now?
WOW, amazing. And it's supposed to mean what?
Sorry, not impressed. Any fresh facts or ideas out there? Or, does one need to read this 20 more times to make sure all know it was "founded in 1999".
How bout this- it's been STRAIGHT DOWN since one of the worst IPO's in stock market history, and is now about a 3 cent stock. Down about 99% from 2008/2009 IPO date to today. No, there's no decimal missing, it's lost 99% of its value (actually a little more). That's not in 1999, that's from 2008 or so to today, modern actual historical facts.
http://venturebeat.com/2008/02/19/three-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust-bioheart-makes-it-across-the-ipo-goal-line-but-with-little-to-show-for-its-struggles/
http://venturebeat.com/2007/10/12/i-told-you-so-eat-your-bioheart-out/#comments
Sounds like the only one using the SCAM word and "implying" anything is you.
Point out anywhere the post I made stated "scam", anywhere?
"One would think KC would consider working at another company"??
She and Tomas just got handed enormous base salary, plus total compensation package increases, despite their stock's performance being dismal IMO, return on investment to shareholder's being dismal IMO, etc. Why leave- why not milk the gig for as long as possible- if shares can continue to be diluted enough to keep some money trickling in as it appears to have been for several yrs now (20 million shares out in about 2010, to now 460 million plus shares total outstanding as of today), why not IMO? It's not that uncommon IMO, especially in penny stock land- "taking care of your own". Two people in the company, their base salaries alone, consume nearly the same amount that was spent on the entire budget last yr for "R&D" (think "trials" and so forth).
See salary and bonus table, most recent 10-K, PAGE 71.
Tomas has upped his annual, total comp package to nearly $1 MILLION a year on a company with a $12.5 million total market cap, and loaded with debt compared to that dismal, $12.5 millin market cap.
Comella, just got about a 50% yr over yr base salary increase- and now a total yearly compensation package equal to $366K. Why leave IMO?
Just those two and their base salaries $159K (comella) + $391K (tomas) = $550K annually.
10-K, PAGE F-4 (balance sheet entries)
R&D (Research and development) expense line entry for entire yr 2013 was $626,983. That's it, total. About $600K.
$550K base salary for two people versus total spent on all R&D, for what is touted as a "development stage, R&D company) was only about $600K, just a bit more than just the base, annual salaries for those two people. That's not including bonuses and "other" compensation- which puts um, those 2, far above what was spent on "R&D".
Anyone who doesn't see a problem with that, IMO is wearing the ole rose colored glasses. It's lopsided by any biz metric, SG&A to R&D spending ratios I'm familiar with- especially for a 3 person "company" who rents an office "suite" of about 5000 sq-ft and about $60K a yr in total lease payments (see 10-K, it's all there). That's my opinions.
"Over 100 million was spent by 2011 "? Why make statements with no factual references, when every last detail, regarding capital sunk to date, stock holder equity, return on equity (there is none in this case), etc is in a document known as the SEC filed 10-K?
Latest 10-K, PAGE 26:
"We are a development stage life sciences company with a limited operating history and a history of net losses and negative cash flows from operations. We may never be profitable, and if we incur operating losses and generate negative cash flows from operations for longer than expected, we may be unable to continue operations.
We are a development stage life sciences company and have a limited operating history, limited capital, limited sources of revenue and have incurred losses since inception. Our operations to date have been limited to organizing our company, developing and engaging in clinical trials of our MyoCell product candidate, expanding our pipeline of complementary product candidates through internal development and third party licenses, expanding and strengthening our intellectual property position through internal programs and third party licenses and recruiting management, research and clinical personnel. Consequently, it may be difficult to predict our future success or viability due to our lack of operating history. As of December 31, 2013, we have accumulated a deficit during our development stage of approximately $118.2 million. Our MyoCell product candidate has not received regulatory approval or generated any material revenues and is not expected to generate any material revenues until commercialization of MyoCell, if ever. Since inception, we have generated substantial net losses, including net losses of approximately $3.1 million, $4.0 million, $4.7 million, $5.2 million, and $4.4 million in 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively and substantial negative cash flows from operations. We anticipate that we will continue to incur significant and increasing net losses and negative cash flows from operations for the foreseeable future "
And, same, most recent 10-K, PAGE F-2, the auditor's commentary:
"The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements, the Company is in the development stage, and has incurred net losses of $118,180,983 since inception. In addition, as of December 31, 2013 the Company’s current liabilities exceed its current assets by $13,362,480. These conditions raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty."
And same 10-K, PAGE F-3: The balance sheet entry:
Shareholder's deficit entry: (118,180,983) (parenthesis of course equal a negative number).
That is the "paid in capital" deficit. $118 million. And what's left to show for it? A 3 cent stock and 460 plus million shares outstanding, a lot of current debt, and a 5 yr chart that's essentially straight down from the IPO date to present. Not sure IMO what's to "celebrate" here or deem a "success" by any stretch of the imagination IMO? By all normally excepted biz standards- it's a near, total bust IMO. That's just the way it is. Any biz person reading the financial history, the current "financials" etc would, I believe, say the same thing- it's in dire shape.
Further - in what, 5, 6 yrs tops maybe, you've gone through 3 or 4 CEO's I believe (can link to all names/announcements if needed), plus a mass exodus of nearly all former BOD members, several major Sr mgt change overs, loss of nearly all employees from a period when there were many, to now 3 total. Hardly a raving "success" story by any stretch I'm familiar with, and IMHO? Don't see it- not in the slightest.
"With cold hard stock options,"? I've never, ever known a consultant who would work "pro bono" for no cash, base pay rate and take "options" (which may, or may not end up worthless), especially on a 3 cent, sub 3 cent stock.
No way, not in my opinion. I've been inside companies who's stock was so hot- it was nearly as good as gold at the time and consultants, consulting "firms" only want cash/contracted rates. Period. And that "golden stock", as in "options" ended up underwater, worthless for most who ever received them, when the stock market took a dive. Look at the history of BHRT "options" going back as far as you want- they'd have nearly all, if not all, expired 100% worthless, as the stock has been a straight down, nose dive from the IPO date, to today.
"Options" don't = money or a certain payment. Options are a gamble on some future event. Even if you grant them "in the money", as of today, if the stock falls tomorrow- they're not worth the paper they're printed on.
No consultant/consulting firm I've ever known would take "options" as up front payment for any work to be performed. They have a going rate you pay for their expertise, they're "hired guns" in every classic sense of the word. They demand top dollar compared to their peers- and they get it, because they deliver results. And hiring um takes money, cash money in my experience and my opinion.
BHRT is "cash poor" - by their own SEC filings. It appears even the few, key employees left may already be foregoing taking salaries- due to lack of cash to pay them, as the 10-K indicates they are owed "loan" or "back payments" (paraphrasing- I can site exact 10-K page number). So if there is not even adequate cash flow to pay them- then what are high dollar consultants going to get paid with?
That's my opinion and the way I see it. Three people total- for a high technology bio-tech biz conducting FDA level phase II/III level trials and supposedly "international" biz dealings and more? My local, very small size Starbucks or my dry cleaner has more than 3 employees, as does my dentist office or the local auto repair place or my local pizza joint/chain- and they are considered micro-micro size businesses, not public stock traded companies. Come on, get real IMO.
" let us know in the upcoming blog."
My opinion- if it's not in the SEC filed 10-Q/10-K or similar SEC document- it doesn't matter to me what it says. That's my opinion.
Look at the PR about "adding to the team" and then a few months later - the reality in the 10-K, is it's down from 5 to now 3.
As to outsourcing- you still need a sizable "core" group who still work for the company- in every instance I've ever been involved with. Consultants and similar need to be managed, as do projects, etc in order to be in compliance with the way the company wants business done, done to the company's core standards and internal policies, etc. The more you outsource- the more time you need for project mgt, meetings, oversite, etc. "Outsourcing" isn't some magic word, panacea "fix all" that just runs on auto-pilot; not by a long shot IMO and experience. Some of the worst projects ever boned up, were done so at the hands of "consultants"- they are legendary in industry.
One employee is the CEO- he is also acting as the chief financial officer among other things/duties per the way he signs off on the SEC docs. 2n'd is Comella CSO who is what, doing "webinars" and "talks" and "conferences" and what- actually running/managing FDA level trials AND overseeing R&D as the CSO all at the same time? Really? In the end- the "employees" are 100% responsible for compliance, regulatory, signing off on everything, etc- you can't pass off/pawn those responsibilities off via simply stating, "we used consultants, it's their fault". Doesn't work that way. You still need a "core" company behind the "outsourcing".
Further, as stated- what are they paying these "consultants" with? Seen the cash realities? I don't think consultants work for penny stock shares, like some of the other "deals" that have been done per the 10-K and similar documents. Most I've ever known want cash, and cash being paid on time. That's my opinion.
"You the ability to utilize others strengths in many areas with considerable less cost."
Paid for with what? Take a look at the financials and cash balance at any given time. "consultants", especially "experts" in bio-med, regulatory and similar fileds don't come cheap- not by a long shot.
Down to THREE "employees"? Was just checking latest 10-K, for period ended Dec 31st, 2013 and wow, hadn't even noticed. What happened - did they lay off some of the "team"?
Latest 10-K, PAGE F-17:
"Reliance on Key Personnel and Consultants
The Company has three full-time employees and no part-time employees. The Company is heavily dependent on the continued active participation of its two current executive officers, one employee and key consultants. The loss of any of the senior management or key consultants could significantly and negatively impact the business until adequate replacements can be identified and put in place."
THREE people as actual "company employees" and, as a company they're doing a phase FDA level II/III trial, a phase I trial in Mexico, they have webinars and conferences and "talks" going on and PR about "deals" all the way from Mexico, to South and Central America to as far as the Middle East, and multiple new "studies" being started (see recent PR) and more potential new "trials/studies" being started, in a wide range of differing fields, not just "the heart" anymore, and it appears (see recent PR's) even more "stuff"- all with THREE PEOPLE who are actual "employees"? Wow. That, is truly amazing IMHO. They don't appear to have much cash at any given time per their financial statements- so don't know how many "consultants" they could really "hire" IMO? Don't know?
And what happened to the fairly recent PR, from just last yr, that several "key team" members had been hired? Where did all that go? That's weird IMO? Really- they were hired for a few months or something and let go?
It looked like on Sept 13th, 2013, that three "new key positions" were added (Sr. compliance officer, Finance and Operations Manager and a Administrative Manager)- sounds like "hired employees" to me, the way it was stated?
http://www.bioheartinc.com/assets/press/2TeamExpansion2013.pdf
So I guess they're not there anymore, about 6 months later? That again, kind weird in just my humble opinion?
The company 10-Q, SEC filing for Sept. 30th, 2013, PAGE 11 stated the following:
"The Company has 4 full-time employees and 1 part-time employee."
So they had 5 "employees" as of that date, but now this 10-K says down to 3? That doesn't sound to me (just my opinion) like an "expanding" and "rapidly growing" company, with "imminent" big sales, "growing revenues" and being "near cash flow positive" etc and similar claims being made in many statements, across multiple "talk boards" and talk outlets that I've read and read numerous times?
So, it sorta looks like IMO, they've been "down sizing" a bit? Those PR about the "team" getting bigger- didn't seem to last too long I guess perhaps? Just my opinion- but the 10-K's say they've reduced as far as I can tell?
Doesn't make any sense IMHO. Again, just my 2 cent opinions. I've never heard of a THREE person company doing "global" operations and FDA trial(s) as in multiple, and conducting "training seminars" and "webinars" and doing "deals" all over the place (again, see most recent 6 months of PR's,etc). That's just amazing IMHO. Seems hard to do- but who knows? I know companies with probably 50 to 200 employees, and annual sales of $100 million or more, and annual budgets in the $50 million or more range, and $10's, if not $100 million more in cash available- and I'm not sure they can handle all that/accomplish all that "stuff" as described in those PR's? THREE people, and almost no cash or money at any given time (last 10-K cash balance $200K total dollars approx. total), wow. That's pretty amazing IMO.
It's more than I can figure out I guess. Just my own due diligence. Do your own. Just my old 2 cent opinion of the way I see it. Buy, sell, hold, whatever based on your own research and good luck and good trading.
"Bioheart has recently applied to the FDA to begin trials"
So, realistically- that's what, about 5 yrs minimum, to maybe as long as 10 yrs to an FDA "approval" for a cash poor, near broke, 3 cent stock, company? Which of the 5 or so employees (see 10-K employee count) do you suppose will be "working" on this one- in addition to the dozen or so other "trials" and various other "undertakings" they've similarly announced? Of course- all while also doing "webinars" and running/managing/interacting with "centers of excellence" all over the planet it appears, to running at least one, if not more phase II/III, FDA level "trials" and more?
Which of the 5 will handle this new "FDA trial"? And it will be funded with what?
Just curious IMHO? Wondering?
No PR yet on 2 BILLION share new allocation, SEC form 14 recently filed?
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=9926197-843-289809&type=sect&TabIndex=2&companyid=734841&ppu=%252fdefault.aspx%253fcik%253d1388319
They just put out numerous PR on some "aging conference" or whatever it is, PR on a recent SEC form 8 filed- but just "skipped" the ole 2 BILLION share count, "material" kinda "event" I guess on the SEC form 14? That's sorta weird IMHO?
Still seems strange to me IMO? Is it like "selective PR" or something? Wonder what makes it into PR and what doesn't? They got that SEC form 8, the Beaumont hospital deal right out on a PR ASAP? Wonder why the SEC form 14, 2 BILLION share new allotment is lost apparently in the PR arena?
Very confusing IMHO? Not sure what happened to the PR release to all the common holders and public and anyone interested, so they can know BHRT is upping the available common share count to 2 BILLION, and the common holders don't even need to/have to vote a proxy, as the insiders all decided it's a done deal already- at least that's the way the SEC filing reads to me, IMO?
Still gonna be looking for the PR. I'd like to see one, IMO. Waiting I guess.
From SEC form:
"Board Approval of the Increase in Authorized Common Shares
On April 16, 2014, our board of directors authorized the increase of the authorized capital stock of the Company from nine hundred and fifty million (950,000,000) shares of common stock and twenty million (20,000,000) shares of preferred stock, both $.001 par value respectively, to two billion (2,000,000,000) shares of shares of common stock and twenty million (20,000,000) shares of preferred stock, both $.001 par value respectively, effective as of the filing of an amendment to the Company's Articles of Incorporation with the Florida Secretary of State.
The Action by Written Consent
Through April 16 2014, the holders of a majority of the votes of the Company’s outstanding voting securities approved the increase of the authorized capital stock of the Company from nine hundred and fifty million (950,000,000) shares of common stock and twenty million (20,000,000) shares of preferred stock, both $.001 par value respectively, to two billion (2,000,000,000) shares of shares of common stock and twenty million (20,000,000) shares of preferred stock, both $.001 par value respectively, effective as of the filing of an amendment to the Company's Articles of Incorporation with the Florida Secretary of State."
Same form:
WE ARE NOT ASKING YOU FOR A PROXY AND YOU ARE REQUESTED NOT
TO SEND US A PROXY.
"The increase in the authorized shares described in the accompanying Information Statement has been duly authorized and approved by the written consent of the holders of a majority of the voting capital shares of the Company’s issued and outstanding voting securities, your vote or consent is not requested or required. "
"The market is pricing this company based on the financials "? As nearly ALL companies are priced/valued- "earnings" being the number one determiner of price across the entire stock market, top line sales growth probably number 2, or customer acquired massive growth (eyeballs - like a Facebook for example- but numbers must be huge, as in staggering enormous and rapid, rapid, growth) then dividends paid out, then perhaps cash on hand- as in an R&D company but they must have yrs of "burn rate" cash on the books and little to no debt typically and extremely strong mgt with track records of past success, etc.
When did that ever change?
And "loans"? Companies with no cash flow, no sales, no revenues, no profits, no assets for the most part, etc are almost never, ever candidates for "loans"- unless someone else, something else is willing to put up what is known as "collateral" and/or security for said loan (a debt instrument).
That's my opinion for course- but backed by lots of stock market, well reported facts from credible source like CNBC or similar, academia statistics, etc from major agencies, funds, research companies etc.
This is just my opinion, but it should be required reading, every 10-K, cover to cover prior to posting on this board. I cannot imagine that anyone with an open mind and without an agenda could come to any other conclusion than this company is in dire financial condition! (auditors and going concern statements in multiple 10-K's back that opinion up, IMO)
Further, I don't think it's anyone's business to tell other free people what they should/should not be "required to view or watch" before being able to POST ON THIS BOARD. Who are you to decide that or set some standard for what me, or any other free person as to what we should be "required" to watch, else we have a supposed "agenda" or don't posses an "open mind"?
"pessimism"? Since when do financial realities, and business condition realities, and the reality of a dismal 3 cent stock price and high debt and massive common share dilution = "pessimism"? Once again, just inserting your own words into the statements/opinions of others. When were you (since you use the word ME and MY and I) appointed the arbiter of all that can, or can not, be said or discussed and then you decide what is optimism or "pessimism" as if you set the standards?
"webinar", does nothing for me personally, and that is just my opinion. There's 100,000's, if not millions of "webinars" on the web. So what? I don't know of a single, major corporation, that is enormously successful and profitable and thriving that was built on "webinars"? I could be wrong, but don't know of any I've ever heard of- and I'm pretty familiar, IMO, with the public markets and company's therein.
Downtrend appears solid now: 4 days broken under the 50 DMA. (50 DMA is now .036)
Two days it traded slightly up on lower vol, but still couldn't even touch the 50 DMA, let alone break back above.
And the other 2 days of the 4, have been down on higher volume, as in today, closing down almost 11%, and going as low as 18% or more during mid day trading.
The 200 DMA is at .019. Looks like that's the next floor- with nothing left in between IMO. It already touched as low as .025 on the highest vol day since breaking the 50 day. So, it looks down from here.
2 BILLION share news, IMO isn't gonna help anything, that's for sure. The last thing a sub 3 cent stock needs, one that's already highly diluted, is more dilution (as in a doubling of the outstanding shares) IMO. It also doesn't make it easier to swallow IMO, when they issue the proxy and essentially say, "We don't need your vote, as we've made sure insiders control it all- so the 2 billion is happening whether you common holders want it or not" (paraphrasing- but that's the jest of the announcement IMHO).
The proxy itself, actually says, "No need to vote- as it's controlled by the insider vote" so don't bother sending anything back or whatever. That's nice for the common holders IMO.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1388319/000114544314000493/d31298.htm
"This Information Statement is circulated to advise the shareholders of action already approved and taken without a meeting by written consent of the holders of a majority of the Company’s outstanding voting common and outstanding voting preferred stock, specifically, management and one non-solicited shareholder, representing 597,553,092 voting capital shares (including 20,000,000 preferred shares that have 25 for 1 voting rights or 500,000,000 voting shares) (62% of the Company’s issued and outstanding voting stock as of the Record Date)."
"The increase in the authorized shares described in the accompanying Information Statement has been duly authorized and approved by the written consent of the holders of a majority of the voting capital shares of the Company’s issued and outstanding voting securities, your vote or consent is not requested or required. "
That just makes a common shareholder feel great IMO. Your vote or consent is not needed or required. Oh well.
Any PR on this yet- I've still been checking and haven't seen it yet? Strange IMO? No "tweets" or facebook fan page updates? The SEC form 8-K, terminating the agreement with Beaumont hospital (as in discharging a debt owed) man, that one got blasted out on the ole "PR" channels, the stock boards, the ole "tweets" and what not, real fast.
Where is the PR on this form 14A filing? Wonder why it's not out their in a big, public PR "blast"? Just strange IMO? Some things go on big "PR" I guess, and other things/material type events, just don't it seems in my opinion? Kinda weird the way I see it? But that's just me and only my opinion.
One's gotta do their own due diligence. Good luck and good trading.
Thanks for the reminder of old PR from Sept. 30, 2013. (9/30/2013)
http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/bioheart-adds-two-service-providers-to-its-team-of-resources-otcqb-bhrt-1835904.htm
Lets see, "intellectual property" among other things is there area of specialty? Interesting? (Also, no mention of them however in most recent 10-K, searched every way possible I know, found no reference to them?)
And what else happened right around this date, as in apparent "litigation"?
Well, the Broward County clerk of the court site says the following was filed, stated as Filing Date: 10/28/2013
https://www.clerk-17th-flcourts.org/Clerkwebsite/BCCOC2/OdysseyPA/CaseSummary.aspx?CaseID=7155410&hidSearchType=party_case&DisplayCitation=no&CaseNumber=CACE13024037&SearchType=
And this appears to involve, among other things, potential "intellectual property" issues. Interesting IMO.
Puts those two "events" almost exactly one month apart. Interesting IMHO.
Good post of old PR. Thanks.
"There were some great buys today."?? Huh?
Check screen- it's BLEEDING RED, and DOWN 15% as of this moment. That's not "buys", not in any world of stocks I'm familiar with?
What ever became of all these past "PR" announcements about "funding" and "expert teams", to new CEOs and all? What did they ever amount to, IMHO? Years of PR just like that "Cassel" PR IMO.
10/15/2012
http://www.biospace.com/News/northstar-biotech-launches-20-million-private/275992
Or:
Aug 2, 2012
http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/bioheart-receives-2-million-term-sheet-investment-offer-from-vitalmex-global-leader-otcbb-bhrt-1686526.htm
Or:
Feb 29, 2012
http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2012/02/29/469402/247547/en/Bioheart-Appoints-Advisory-Board-of-Business-and-Financial-Executives.html
Or:
http://www.bizjournals.com/southflorida/stories/2007/03/05/daily23.html?jst=s_cn_hl
Or: even 2008, "big plans"
http://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2008/12/16/389897/156464/en/Bioheart-Inc-Announces-Plans-to-Divest-Non-Core-Products-to-Increase-Focus-On-Heart-Failure-Treatments.html?print=1
Or:
June 25th, 2010
http://www.bizjournals.com/southflorida/stories/2010/06/21/daily42.html?page=all
Or, the ole "strengthens the team PR"- how many of those have their been?
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Bioheart+Strengthens+Executive+Team+in+Order+to+Accelerate+Business...-a0206048389
Or, the ole "Middle East" , way back in 2010 (where have we heard "Middle East" before recently?) What did that ever amount too?
http://www.celltherapyfoundation.org/Blog/May-2010/Bioheart-Announces-Cell-Therapies-Program-in-the-M
Or, how bout a "WORLD" ole "summit" - you know those "talks" and meetings, this is 2009, what did that amount too?
http://www.finanznachrichten.de/nachrichten-2009-09/14919791-bioheart-inc-to-participate-in-the-2009-world-stem-cell-summit-on-september-23rd-008.htm
OR, more "key team members"- including one that promised "big sales numbers", Matt Fendrich and a big "finance guy" ole Alan P. Timmins. How did that "work out"? 2008.
http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2008/11/05/387740/153843/en/Bioheart-Adds-Key-Senior-Members-to-Its-Team-Vice-President-of-Sales-Marketing-and-Seasoned-Board-Member.html
Those are just a "few" of the ole "PR's", there's way, way, way more than that. "Centers of excellence" clear back in like 2010, South America and Mexico and all, clear back in like 2009/2010- same IMO, as PR in recent months. What does it ever amount too? That's my question? It's at sub 3 cents, cash poor, highly diluted now- and what did all these "teams of experts" and "summits" and "finance experts" and "advisory committees" and new CEO's, etc ever really amount to, especially as to where the common stock holder is concerned? What? That's a legit question IMO.
Three CEO's since what, 2009 (Leonhardt, Dr. Groth and now Tomas)- and the stock is at sub 3 cents, and the shares have massively diluted from maybe 20 million total, tops- to now about 460 million shares outstanding and now 2 BILLION authorized? So, does the "Cassel" ole "PR" get me too excited? No? There is literally, at least half a dozen just like it in 4 yrs or so IMO (I've read um all), I can link back to- that all say "lots of stuff", but all with those key words like "may" or "might happen" or "could lead to" etc, etc. That's my opinion and mine only.
So, the 14C mentions "Cassel" in it? Big whoop IMHO. Doesn't do it for me personally.
Do one's own due diligence and good luck.
"Expecting a decent week "? Expecting a total collapse back the 2 cent range, maybe as low as 1 penny.
That's what the 2, 2.5 yr chart is saying, especially given the outstanding share count being increased to a massive 2 BILLION shares on a sub 3 cent stock.
It's now down about 66% from .08 peak of March 6th. .08-.027 = .053/.08 = .66 X 100 = 66% down off peak.
Hardly "strong support" or "strong buying" IMHO?
All my opinions. Do one's own due diligence.