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.
LEAD by EXAMPLE
Do the stockholders deserve a management team that has skin in the game or a management team that is granted their shares?
If you go back a the beginning of 2014 it will make sense. It is not a quick exercise of math. Take your time and be purposeful. Notice the 500,000 shares someone in management owned but now they do not. The shares went somewhere. My real point is the management and executives should have skin in the game and they do not in my opinion. Two percent ownership is a poultry sum. Now consider they have the ability to buy shares as little as .29p/s it is ridiculous.
It is difficult for a retail investor to commit tens of thousands of dollars of capital when the CEO does not do the same at the retail price anyone can buy at. If the management wants to raise the bar LEAD BY EXAMPLE.Take the lead with Blackrock and buy in at an accumulated percent of 5+% and show the investing community you believe in what you do and that that there is something of substance here besides large paychecks and perks.
Why yes I have heard and have read thousands of Form 4's. Did you ever look at the link I posted showing the 500,000 options that the doctor has?
LEAD by EXAMPLE
If you go back a the beginning of 2014 it will make sense. It is not a quick exercise of math. Take your time and be purposeful. Notice the 500,000 shares someone in management owned but now they do not. The shares went somewhere. My real point is the management and executives should have skin in the game and they do not in my opinion. Two percent ownership is a poultry sum. Now consider they have the ability to buy shares as little as .29p/s it is ridiculous.
It is difficult for a retail investor to commit tens of thousands of dollars of capital when the CEO does not do the same at the retail price anyone can buy at. If the management wants to raise the bar LEAD BY EXAMPLE.Take the lead with Blackrock and buy in at an accumulated percent of 5+% and show the investing community you believe in what you do and that that there is something of substance here besides large paychecks and perks.
From Form K10 3-7-2017
Pilot Study in Acute, Cervical SCI
In addition to the thoracic pivotal study described above, we are in active discussions with Health Canada to initiate an early feasibility human pilot study, as the initial phase of a larger pivotal study, of our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold under an Investigational Testing Authorization application (“ITA”) for the treatment of complete, traumatic cervical acute SCI. We expect that the pilot study will be approved and initiated in the first half of 2017.
Although we desire to support a similar cervical study in the United States, the FDA has notified us that our proposed study was disapproved in the United States, pending submission of additional data from The INSPIRE Study. We remain in discussions with the FDA regarding such disapproval and are hopeful that data generated in The INSPIRE Study will support moving into cervical SCI in the United States.
Devos was a speculation from my post. I presumed you were making an input. To the dead money of two years.
What I asked was the source of your assurance that this was not dead money for two years.
I am aware of the study parameters. I am aware that changes in the study parameters would cause major problems and time. If you have a source I would enjoy the read. Otherwise your assurance is nothing more than a speculation. My two years comes from the math. If it takes to the end of 2017 to enroll the remaining eight patients. Assume an additional sixth month follow up period without any negative results. Then add in three months for approval again without surprises and you are at October 2018.
And the source for your assurance come from?
It could with 30 sites but even if the final eight were to take the remainder of the year and assuming no unexpected problems this remains dead for two years.
Sixty percentage of enrollment over a two year period. Another two years for the additional patients to be enrolled and reviewed. Then a year or longer for review and potential approval assuming nothing is unexpected. Minimal communication from management and executives. Insider trades non existent. Conclusion dead money for an additional three years minimum.
I challenge management to give us guidance considering the retail stockholder does not buy in at a price as low as .29 p/s. Management owes the ownership that much at a bare minimum and can do so without breaking any laws or confidentiality agreements. It appears they prefer to say little to nothing and expect people to guess while choosing not to communicate on the most simplistic level. Sad, misguided,and/or trying to pull the wool over eyes...I have not decided. What I have decided is they are compensated well for their individual skill sets.
I agree missed opportunities. However, with this technology I have a hard time with the pedigrees involved wandering what motive they would have to miss any opportunity. Any thoughts?
I was always told to follow the insiders. On this one I would not have thought that until fifteen months ago. Then the sirens began singing their haunting sounds. I still told myself cant be look at the credentials and pedigree of the participants. Hard to believe thirty facilities involved and no new participants in months.
Hound to be specific I counted per SEC filings a total share count currently held for officers and directors, 12 individuals, to be a total of 898,403 shares. That is in the neighborhood of 2% accumulative ownership. In my thoughts that is unacceptable especially since these were granted or purchased at discount. It only stands to reason in my mind that these are the company managers and they have invested minimal dollars which reflects a lack of confidence in the process and final products being developed.
I seriously doubt that few if any individual share holders have paid as little as.29 cents per share as the company managers have or have the right in the future to purchase.
I encourage management to respond and enlighten all interested parties as to their side of this conundrum that needs to be resolved.
You can start with the SEC filings where I completed my research.
One month ago I was looking for major holders of Invivo. I started with the Executive staff and the Board of Directors. Less than a year ago they had a reasonable amount of stock between them. Now I can find NO evidence that they hold much stock in the company they manage. Can someone correct me or did they cash out of their positions? If no one can correct me is it time for a change in management or can management explain their reasons?
I gave it another read and understand your frame of thought. However, this still remains a chance that it will be approved which is what my point was. In my mind a chance is the same as a gamble since there is no guarantee.
I have no clue what your link has to do with anything unless you want to go off topic. Also you and I must read English differently. If you read the bottom of page 22 of the corporate presentation you will read the following which states not guaranteed.
"NOTE: Approval is not guaranteed if the OPC is met and HDE approval may still be obtained if OPC is not met"
Feel free to demonstrate the error of my reading comprehension.
If you read the corporate literature the Cohort is nothing more than an attempt to skip a step because they are banking on the need with limited data.
Why not it is an option that will save several years of the process, assuming it is accepted. The fact is there is no guarantee in life even the corporate literature will tell you this is a gamble. No guarantees at all.
I remain in awe at people here that want to earn pennies on a ROI. Why would anyone want pennies when they can wait another year and receive dollars?
I am also amazed at people here that question the legal strategy. If there is anyone here that is more qualified than counsel of record, inform of us of your credentials and track record, educating the rest us where a boutique law firm has strayed.
If I am understanding the concerns correctly I ask myself why. Has the words of Supreme Court Justice Roberts been considered? It appears his words well over a year ago regarding the Supreme Court intervention to those that define the law as they see fit as opposed to enforcing laws as they are written have been heeded. If one is patient all of this back and forth speculation will prove to be pointless.
Awesome. So is he annoyed yet?
The price is in the low 4's what is your next move?
Care to share what a "walloping" is defined as?
Here are a few links to demonstrate the dollar value of this market. Three percent of that is a very large number. Comments?
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/01/26/digital-gaming-sales-hit-record-61-billion-in-2015-report.html
https://newzoo.com/insights/rankings/top-25-companies-game-revenues/
https://geeks.media/biggest-gaming-companies
MOBILE Devices is 100million annually
http://www.pocketgamer.biz/list/62773/top-50-mobile-game-developers-of-2016/
http://fortune.com/2015/01/15/mobile-console-game-revenues-2015/
I believe people have forgotten. Perhaps if we put our heads together we can awaken people. Any ideas?
Counsel stated two years ago that he was not worried about the three years because it can be appealed for up to 15 years of lost compensation. Other here will disagree and say laches doctrine will only allows a total of six years
Zomby....make me smart. No one has answered the following so maybe you will be the first. Why would WDDD settle? Why would they take second best when ATVI has used up their bag of legal tricks?
Voicechat...I believe if you sit back and watch the entertainment that counsel is about to introduce to producers of electronic games and many large infringing corporations throughout the UNITED STATES. When this happens your nickel concern will dissipate. Counsel and Kidrin have already shown their cards IMHO. "They will leave their options open" sounds to me either ATVI capitulates or they will have to answer in front of a Demand Jury, Judge Casper who has already allowed three years of infringement to be argued by the evidence, and many ATVI stockholders that have not been informed of the impending UGLY HAIRCUT, along with the validated patents that have been scrutinized by a group of people that disqualify 80% of patent reviews.
ATVI has used up all the stall tactics that their legal team could concoct. It is now time for ATVI to receive their overdue HAIRCUT. Jury's in America do not like large corporations that willfully, maliciously, and habitually ignore the law and monetarily attempt to cripple the little guy. All the while conducting business with the arrogant attitude "as long as I have money I do not have problems."
Sit back get the popcorn and coke ready while the best show of the decade unfolds hopefully on, "Camera in the Courtroom", so we can see it live. I understand the barber has already been booked to give the CEO of ATVI the first humbling HAIRCUT
Stocks while I respect your input $1-$2p/s plus 1 ATVI share for 1000 WDDD is cheap and unacceptable in my perspective. It goes back to WDDD settling. Why would WDDD, BOD, or counsel settle for crumbs when there is real money that is at stake by ATVI(treble damage) and many other titles? Do you not believe that willful and malicious activity by a large corporation in a demand jury trial will not reap larger dollars than your theory?
Lets see. A year behind schedule, little to no communication from the executive staff, stock has been sinking for months, no cash flow until 2018 minimum, cervical study was put on hold indefinitely by the FDA, and next week the fed meets to raise rates and I do not think that was or is backed into the stock, executives are compensated handsomely for results. Where are the results?
Tryz...why in the world would a 250,000,000 make you happy? Have you not done the math? First, why would we settle for anything? ATVI and many others owe billions. Secondly, if 15% is possible the check should be 1.5 billion including treble. After fees this is 2.88p/s without a multiple. If you add in a multiple of 8 you are looking at $14.00 per share conservatively.
Your response seems cogent. If eventually $3 p/s is possible that is still a long way from .04 we are at now. Any thoughts after ATVI is settled how much time it will take the other infringers to pay up?
Thanks for the input. Well, even if I am 100% wrong if the stock is at .04 and it will get to .50-.60 that is still a handsome spread.
I agree my math maybe aggressive only if you can explain a few things.
First, I agree the patents have expired. However, since it has been established that it was a clerical error the United States Code as I read it says the amount of years that you were unable to be compensated for your property due to USPTO error is tacked onto the end. So if that is true and I believe it is also true that counsel will appeal the three years Judge Casper allowed, then how is it that over the course of fifteen years (2000-2016) it would not be a revenue stream for the infringement? Or Is there something that says patent infringement is a one time payout?
Otherwise my math will stand at least for my models. I do however appreciate your input. I am not sure why you are so confident in 30% for counsel but I will certainly revisit my numbers if that is factual.
Assuming I am incorrect about all of my assumptions and model and you are 100% correct do you know what counsel believes the value in dollars will be demanded by jury trial along with treble and will attorneys fees be added to that figure?
bionock
Do the math yourself. Complete a Monte Carlo and you will see a year ago that the low end was $3.80 per share. The maximum was $8.90 per share. Now that there are claims that have been validated, Judge Casper is ready to move forward, more companies have been targeted as infringers of the technology, ATVI stock is sinking, treble damages are now very realistic and a near gaurantee, there is proof ATVI was offered a a license and/a JV years ago, counsel has no reason to accept crumbs from an ATVI offered settlement, and there will be up to fifteen years of cash flow in the billions of dollars.
I have been laughed at and scoffers have said my ideas were nothing more than fantasia. But simply if you were to take a minimum two billion dollars up front from ATVI and assume counsel gets half, subtract out 38% corporate tax for the IRS and you get $620,000,000, divide that out by 200,000,000 shares and you are at $3 per share but that is without a multiple. Use a 5 multiple and you are at $15.00 per share. Use a 10 multiple and you are at $30 per share.
Then ATVI will be paying a fee of somewhere in the neighborhood of 4% - 6% for at least a decade on US sales and you will get $50,000,000 minimum per year. Then allow for twenty five companies that generate 100 billion minimum US sales at 4% - 6% for a minimum of a decade. These twenty five will pay handsomely up front. The multiple on wall street should be 25 give or take a point.
I believe you are looking at a stock worth a minimum of $15 per share and a maximum of $45 per share immediately after ATVI.
Anyone that says this is a $2 per share stock does not know how to complete a valuation. I challenge everyone to not accept my math. Rather I challenge you to complete a Monte Carlo on your own. Then research on Google how Wall Street values companies whether they are IT, start up, IPO, or mature company.
Yes I have skin in the game and for those that are here for a day or two to make a few pennies we will never agree.
I have always thought of the multiple. Why do you think Kidrin would walk away after being justified in his work after all these years and leave the share holders that backed his efforts by staying in the game?
Well I have to disagree because the United Sates Code expressly states that if the USPTO has made a clerical error on a patent that has disallowed compensation to the patent owner the years lost will be tacked onto the end of the patent. That being said yes there will be an upfront amount of money plus treble damages. Then they will owe for up to 15 years they did not pay royalties on. Please do not trust my words go to the US Code and read it for yourself.
The 25-50 titles are the ones that I have placed in my model as targets for infringement. I realize there maybe many more targets. I also agree the military and other agencies have used video avatars for years.
Thanks for the input.
Why just six years when the United States Code says fifteen years when the USPTO has made the error?
Why would Kidrin, the board, counsel and the longs here settle for $2-$3 when you can get $10+/- per share? You stated that with this win it could put it at $5p/s. Would you also figure in the other 25-50 titles that will have to pay? They will either pay large up front or a reduced rate over many years for their infringement and license fee. Then could you also put a multiple on the award for the years of future payment? A conservative multiple would be 8 and then use 25 which would be the extreme valuation.
I have completed my calculations but I would like to consider your opinion as well.
Yes I know for some this is nothing more than a gamble. I have never felt that way. Now with validated portions of patents it is a gauranteed fact that counsel will have the demanded jury hearing.
No matter. Claim 2 and 7 are HUGE in and of themselves. Within the next 18 hours we should know where we stand on everything.