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.
You guys really need to do some due diligence.. this same "waiting on FDA reclassification at any moment" and "We're waiting by the fax machine" etc etc was being touted years ago on this stock to pump it up.. nothing has changed. What next? DeNovo anybody?
Correct. July 2009.
"We're waiting by the fax machine" I think Andy said back then... and still waiting 5 years later.
Guess someone forgot to tell the FDA, lol...
Look at the bottom of the 8K. It was not filed by the creditors, it was filed by ACTC - a disclosure required by the SEC.
LOL.. man... seriously.. you really think anyone can just go file an 8K on any company they want??? (tip: they can't)
A solid green day would be nice, but once again we see the gap up on open, then pulled back down within minutes. Same pattern day after day, indicative of manipulation. If it weren't for the recent 8K default notice, I'd be loading up big time right now.
Holy hannah.. ok, look at the date the 10K was issued. Now look at the date the 8K default notice was issued. The 8K was only 2 weeks ago, meaning that, by their own admission, they defaulted on the payment they referred to in the earlier 10K. I don't understand how you can repeatedly deny that which is right in front of you. Here it is again for you.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1140098/000101968714001483/advancedcell_8k.htm
Obviously I prefer they didn't default on a payment, but I'm not going to ignore the fact that they did...
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1140098/000101968714001483/advancedcell_8k.htm
There's the SEC link for you yet again.
Yes, default. I don't know why anyone would try to argue that they didn't default - I really don't think they would issue an 8K Default Notice for fun, lol! Again, here's the proof..
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1140098/000101968714001483/advancedcell_8k.htm
Lawds you must be *pissed*!!! How much have you lost on this so far?
Look at this post from 3.5 years ago..
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=55005508
Still waiting, lol.
BIEL performance to date on my holdings (or what is left at least): Loss of 97.8%
Awesome.
"Any buyout attempt is likely to result in a bidding war, so that is not a major concern."
Good point. I also wondered a bit if the recent dilution etc. is a kind of poison pill to ward off hostile takeover..
It started because of this
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1140098/000101968714001483/advancedcell_8k.htm
Unfortunately we are getting a little short on time without some cash injection or further dilution.
JV and immediate uplist are wishful thinking on my part right now, lol. There would need to be a new proxy sent out for approval, you are correct.
I mean there *are* ways around it with an existing entity which is already listed on a higher exchange being used to swallow the smaller entity (ACTC), even though technically they may be the same individuals in control.. they buy in for market pps, get the uplist, and reap the rewards..
Have to go sorry
Think what you wish - this is a discussion board and we all can have opinions. I have outlined a number of possibilities, some positive, some not, unfortunately many of the counter arguments have not been constructive or rational, but instead been emotion-fueled personal attacks or accusations that I am some paid shill.. or just outright denial.
Paying heed to statements of intention within a 10K is relevant of course, however intentions don't always pan out, as we all well know... to discount a statement of fact in the form of an 8K notice of default though is nothing short of willful ignorance.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1140098/000101968714001483/advancedcell_8k.htm
I am hoping for JV and uplist, but history is littered with similarly positioned companies who have chosen the route of screwing the shareholders to better their own position in the long run. Self-interest far more often wins out over altruism. Just human nature, sadly.. to ignore that fact is folly.
Best scenario : trading halted to announce a JV coupled with uplist.
The shorters HAVE to cover their positions when it moves to a different exchange, and shareholders would be setting the cost for them to do so.. I've said it before, this could create an exponential explosion in pps far beyond what the science alone warrants (at this stage).. ACTC may be playing a risky game, but so are the shorters..
On the other hand, we could be looking at a reorganization via Chapter 11, in which case we shareholders will be royally screwed.
I continue to be very concerned at the silence from ACTC management in the face of such heavy shareholder concern, and the lack of contract renewal for Lanza..
Also consider that much of this uncertainty may be being driven by large pharma (indirectly of course).. they are not interested in cures, only treatments, so this science could be perceived as a threat to them, and they react accordingly..
LOL ok so perhaps we were misinterpreting each other then - one of the hazards of written communication.
Just to reiterate, I agree that given the huge potential, no judge/jury/panel *should* consider ACTC IP rights as compensation, but that opinion is based on your and my personal knowledge/due diligence of the science at play here. Juries in particular would very likely be completely ignorant of the potential here, and I know from experience that sometimes a jury/panel decision can go inexplicably opposite to what any logic would expect. All you need is one obstinate juror and the rest of the jury wanting nothing more to get on with their lives, and boom, logic goes out the door and they go the way of least resistance, justice be damned.
Add into that mix a skilled lawyer who can convince the judge/panel/jury that the science has a definable current value based on the current market cap (and that is a perfectly reasonable measure), and that could easily be enough to make a successful claim, even to an actively involved jury.
Our opinion of whether it is fair is immaterial, unless we are on that panel... and we would never be picked by plaintiff for that very reason.. we're too informed.
Forums etc are just the contemporary version of the boiler rooms of the past, the flim-flam con artists before them, and the traveling snake-oil salesmen that went before them. The game has always been the same, just the mode is different based on the technology available.
I work full time. I'm on a lunch break right now (albeit late). Best I get back to work actually, lol.
Ok settle down, let me clear this up as you seem to have misinterpreted me twice now. I initially posted that, as a result of the default, the creditor could, if they so wished, quite legally seek compensation which could include rights to IP (not ALL of it, but an attributable portion) - basically they could claim anything that could be assigned a value with reasonable arguement. That is not to say a judge or jury/panel would approve it, but certainly the door is open for them to go after it now. I know if I was in their position, I would be doing exactly that.
Whether you or I like it or not or think it's fair or not is immaterial - the fact is that the default action has opened the possibility for the creditor to make this claim. That was my statement.
Your initial response seemed to infer that I was claiming the creditors were actually going ahead with this action, which is not something I said at all, thus I replied that you were speaking out of context (perhaps "out of context" was poor choice of words by me, but essentially that's what you were doing).
Your next paragraph I am just going to leave alone, it was way too emotional to discuss rationally.
Your final statement that "I am right on this note "They are NOT seeking compensation in the form of an IP" because they know that is unreasonable and know they WON'T get it." ...Again, while you and I may agree it is unreasonable considering the potential in this science, our opinion is immaterial. As far as
'they know they won't get it".. sorry, but you are only fooling yourself imho. Any half-decent lawyer or prosecutor could tell you that you go for as much as possible, and then negotiate it down from there. If you're lucky, a judge/jury/panel will not be as informed or as 'sold' on this science as you or I are, and not appreciate the true potential, and thus, if the lawyer is worth his/her salt, they will convince the judge/jury/panel exactly what constitutes reasonable compensation and why.. and the current pps could actually support their claim.
You of course are entitled to your opinion that no lawyer would even try. My experience tells me most definitely otherwise, and in fact they would be fools not to.
Hope that clears that all up.
ACTC employee levels - well let's take a look at the facts.
There are almost 28 million small businesses in the US and over 22 million are self employed with no additional payroll or employees (refer sources listed below).
If 40 employees is 1/6th of average, as claimed by the person I am responding to... that would mean the average small business size is 240 employees.
Facts are that over 75% of small businesses in US have no employees other than the business owner him/herself, so the claim that ACTC's 40 employees is "about 1/6th the employees of the average small business in America" is clearly false.
Sources:
United States Census Bureau. “2011 Nonemployer Statistics.” U.S. Department of Commerce: http://censtats.census.gov/cgi-bin/nonemployer/nonsect.pl
Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy: http://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/FAQ_Sept_2012.pdf
United States Census Bureau: Statistics about Business Size (including Small Business) http://www.census.gov/econ/smallbus.html
United States Census Bureau: Statistics of U.S. Businesses: http://www.census.gov/econ/susb/
First up, you are making statements out of context. The terms & conditions quoted by another poster already infer that rights to IP are *possible* because of this default, not that they are actively seeking compensation in the form of IP, at least not yet.
Info was posted a couple of days ago, soon after the default notice was released. I think it was also posted on ICell. Sorry, I am way too busy irl to go back and dig it up again for you, but it was there if you care to do your own dd.
If a debtor defaults on a payment agreement, then certainly a creditor has a right to seek recompense in whatever form is available to them, including rights to IP if it can be assigned a value. Whether you or I think that decision or the value assigned is fair is irrelevant.
Again, to my knowledge, such action is not yet being actively sought, all that was said was that the default opens ACTC up to it. which in my book is a serious lapse in judgement by ACTC... unless there is something going on that we are not privy to yet. Hard to know, given the history here.
I don't understand it either FVH, but according to a post a few days ago quoting the terms & conditions, a default does expose rights to ACTC's IP. Very careless of ACTC, or (as I am hoping) there's something going on we are not privy to.
Same shirt, different day. Gap up at open, pps continues up, so mm's yank it back down within minutes. Every day the same.. they just wont let the pps move up naturally.
Depends who you are talking about. Settlement had already been reached in the case where ACTC has now defaulted on an agreed payment. Perhaps they want to force it back into court, but judges aren't usually sympathetic to defaulters... and ACTC take a huge risk if they did it on purpose for that reason, and also if it does end up in a jury trial (not bench trial), juries can be notoriously unpredictable. ACTC appear to take all the risk in this action. The results may also detrimentally affect other settlements, or open up new litigation.. OR it may be ACTC think that with the restated filings they can lessen their liability, but that's a huge risk when IP is technically now at stake as well.
Please explain why you'd call Lanza narcissistic when it is TIME bestowing this honor, not Lanza honoring himself...
Umgawa???
Sadly I'll agree - they would be far more likely to take the IP and sell to the highest bidder, which they are entitled to do now ACTC defaulted. Cash is King. ACTC would have to present a HUGE carrot to get these creditors to back down after a default.. but then, maybe ACTC *do* have a huge carrot to offer.. certainly not impossible considering current results with the science (or alleged results, until we see a peer review on it).
Probably all legal staff, LOL!.. Just joking.
They already negotiated the settlement after the back and forth that you speak of and an order. ACTC have defaulted on the negotiated agreement. Not the same at all as what you seem to be portraying, as much as I wish it was. This was a default on a decision already reached, not part of the settlement process. Default allows the plaintiff to go back and press for higher damages, and they could get it if they think ACTC can produce the money.. or IP instead.. very very dangerous game ACTC are playing.
I agree FVH. ACTC needs a knight in shining armor right now - in the form of a JV or non-dilutive financing, either one from an entity with very deep pockets, or we shareholders are going to suffer far worse. I'm still hoping there's something going on we are not privy to, but perhaps that is just wishful thinking.. the default cannot be explained away that easily,unfortunately.
Any reports from the conference regarding strategic partnerships/financing or whatever it was?
WAY MORE THAN 10X APPRECIATION, TRY 170X !!!!! HERE'S HOW:
$175m current market cap X 170 = $30B market unmet
$0.06 pps x 170 = $10+ pps
>>> PPS PROJECTED $10+ ON CURRENT FLOAT <<<
HERE'S HOW:
$175m current market cap X 170 = $30B market unmet
$0.06 pps x 170 = $10+ pps
UMGAWA!! WhOOOOP!!!
ORPHAN STATUS, FDA FAST TRACK
UMGAWA!! WhOOOOP!!!
ACTC LEAD $30BILLION UNTAPPED MARKET
UMGAWA!! WHOOOP!!!
I hope sooner than end of year.
>>>> ACTC STARTS PHASE II <<<<
..any day now!!!
UMGAWABANANA!!!!
>>>> ACTC UPLIST <<<<
It could happen soon!!!
UMGAWABANANA!!!!
Lincoln Park have already made their commitment... of course they probably won't expand it the way things stand right now lol..
Why do you say that Gastrodamas?
Pretty much tells you all you need to know about a certain individual and his relationship with IHub..
UMGAWA!!!!! A???
I have read hundreds of posts on this board about shorting ACTC, so I would like to also comment on this topic in relation to ACTC.
First up you need to understand that no ordinary individual investor is going to be able to short ACTC while it remains an OTC penny stock. The reason I say this is because trading houses require you to have covering funds if you want to short any stock, just in the same way you need covering securities to utilize a margin account, and that requirement means a minimum $3 or $5 PER SHARE cover as standard (depending on which trading house you use.. it usually corresponds to the same minimum $ value they use for margin trading).
That means for ACTC for an ordinary individual investor, for every single share you want to short at say $0.06 pps, you would need at least $3 or $5 in cash or securities to cover it, and those funds or securities would be held so you could not use them until you close your short position. For example, if you wanted to short say 500,000 ACTC shares at $0.06 which is a total short of $30,000, you would need $1.5-$2.5m in cash and/or securities to secure it..
Clearly the cost of shorting for an average investor is going to be unreachable, or in the case of an individual who does have millions in cash and/or cash equivalents, it's not going to be cost-effective tying up that amount of money for such a comparatively small short position. Besides the huge risk involved, that's why most trading houses will just say 'no' to shorting ACTC or similar OTC penny stocks... even though technically they can do it if you have multiple millions of dollars sitting there to cover it... but again, the cost to cover it is so high, you'd be better off to day trade blue chips with that cash than have it tied up covering a piddly penny short... heck, even the dividends on some stocks with that sort of money would make better sense.
The only people who can short this effectively are mm's who at times will go hog wild naked shorting in this wild west of the investment world... basically because they don't really answer to anyone and they decide themselves to allow the short position.
There is one positive side to ACTC being shorted and ACTC management remaining quiet though; when management one day (hopefully) halt trading to unexpectedly announce uplist, those shorts are going to have to cover immediately, and the naked shorters in particular are going to find themselves in a deep pile of doo-doo, because you can't play fast and loose like that on the bigger boards, and all existing positions have to be closed when ACTC transitions to a different exchange. It is this fact that may cause this stock to explode far beyond what is warranted if an uplist is announced unexpectedly, as long as everyone doesn't dump too soon on the run up and thereby provide the shares the naked shorters require to cover their positions.
So there you go, clearly on-topic with ACTC and many discussions on shorting ACTC that have been going on here for a long long time.
A little relieved the pps has managed to hold, although very very low volume today. Since the past good news has had little impact on pps, I guess it follows that the current bad news shouldn't make much of an impact either, lol.
True that too - a biotech with good news often translates to gap ups in the order of tens if not hundreds of percentage points. That's what makes the risk/reward so tempting.. I would not be risking my money on ACTC if the possible ROI was not stunningly huge. Despite my fears at present, ACTC has (at least until now) been one of the most promising investments I have held.