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’re right. Maybe that’s what they meant by year of the shareholder. The best year to average down. Maybe at a couple of pennies, the goal of 200,000 will finally be accomplished. Ok, maybe partial penny price. LMBO
Seriously though I think this week will be telling if the dilution event is a go. I still think they’ll get it higher.
From their 2015 “letter to shareholders”.
“Due to strong interest from outside companies, in 2015 we will seek to out-license the device we have developed to thaw cells. The device was designed to ensure the quality and consistency of the thawing process, which is needed to maintain the consistent quality and potency of any cell therapy products.”
Maybe just another couple visitors to Zami’s empty booths.
What happened to that one eh. “Strong interest”. LMBO. Reminds me of thei strong interest from potential partners we have had for many many years. Should have exploded by now with all the increasing interest.
Funny to look back at them. Shows how inept they have been for such a long period of time. Sad really.
Yet another reason to be “ok with management”
Wonder how many free shares they all walked away with. You know the ones used to retain employees. Too bad nobody at the very top leaves. But they have that covered now. Company would be bk if any of the head honcho disappears. Golden parachutes for any possibility now. Kind of like a chartist that makes every call.
I would have said the same thing last year before the raise. I don’t understand how they do it, but they do. We’ve gone a whole year without one, so we’re well overdue. I think last years raise, was a result of our board. Maybe this one will be for Fijians only. Hoping they’re asleep while we’re awake and have missed everything, just like our company does. Look at a map and will pick the farthest place away. Go any farther and you’re coming back.
No it’s not old news and you know it. I search Pluristem a lot as well, and see where you get pretty much all your info related to Pluristem. I am the only one searching on my end, and don’t have a team doing doing it hourly for me. I have been to that site many times before. It always just had good ole Ohad on there. Even if it was old, which it isn’t, seems pretty strange to have 10 ex Pluristem employees now listed on their management team. Especially since he left October of 2015. All left 4 years ago. Jokes. Did they all join a company started before the company started?
Not thinking they’re going to overtake Pluristem with their manufacturing. Don’t know or care what they’re doing. It’s the recent addition of ex Pluristem employees that I’m talking about. The Kakster stated “From early on, our strategy was to build an in-house manufacturing facility. Having achieved that, we are now in a unique position within the industry, and have a broad understanding of its needs”. They achieved that goal already. So who knows what there new one is. It changes frequently. Outsource manufacturing?
I’m ok with them too. LMBO
Have a look at this. Ex Pluristem employee Ohad Karnieli has plucked 10 people from Pluristem. Or they were let go. Is Pluristem’s cost cutting plan coming into play? Are they abandoning manufacturing in house? Somethings happening. Many seem to had held titles on the manufacturing side.
Maybe they realized a 75L bioreactor wasn’t going to cut it. That gave them the ability to manufacture a whopping 30 billion cells per run. Or 200 doses at 150mil per dose.
http://www.at-vio.com/staffDetails.asp?s=1
Here’s something that will show the progress on the manufacturing front. From a PR from 2012.
“Pluristem Therapeutics, Inc. (Nasdaq:PSTI) (TASE:PLTR) today announced that it has initiated the process of scaling up the Company's manufacturing bioreactors from their current size of 5 liter (L) to 15L.”
https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2012/03/12/470542/248891/en/Pluristem-Begins-Up-Scaling-Its-PLX-Cell-Bioreactors.html
Now if you look at their site today under 3D manufacturing platform from the technology section, you will see a couple of things. First, it mentions a 75L bioreactor. And at the bottom, a line that states “3D culturing-70 times more efficient.
http://www.pluristem.com/3d-manufacturing-platform/
Is that where we are at. In 6 1/2 years, we have gone from 15L to 75L. Please someone show me I’m wrong. We are not still sitting at 75L are we. Funny I remember someone long ago saying a jump to 750L or somewhere around that, and that’s honestly where I thought we were. Did a search of 150L as well, since I seemed to recall that and didn’t find that either.
What the heck do we have in our 6350 square foot clean room? These reactors we see in pictures are pretty small. How much have this expanded clean room cost over the many years it’s been operational.
But ya. Thermo wants US. I certainly hope all the 1000 to 2000L bioreactors our there can’t do what we can. I’ve searched this many times and I think they can. Don’t think our 75L will cut it, if that is the actual case.
Another reason to be “ok with management”.
I see. I do though think they will be right in these late day price moves having some meaning though. What other explanation is there to jump off the new 52 week low. No reason at all. We should have gone below a buck. If they can get this thing moving upwards before the raise, hats off to whoever coordinated that effort. Should know soon. The walking stick figure climbing up the graph, added to the upcoming IC update, could be the first step.
Initial results were certainly a dud. Never did get my answer as to if secondary measures listed on a presentation, are acceptable for FDA review. Would have thought Celularity would have done the same, if that were the case. Would ease the difficulty of the design you would think.
What was the nope for? I think it is all part of the pump as well. Some watching charts will dive right in. Rookies. Your scenario after the dilution, is the likely outcome, for sure.
How many times we see that one before? All to go down the very next day. Why didn’t IS follow until the very last moment on 7K shares. False hopes. Grasping at straws. It’s the stuff some here are Hopeing for. LMBO.
But like I just said tonight. This time I believe you may be correct, for once. Day traders are needed for the task at hand. Watch for news to now stick.
Did we get another potential Lonza deal again? Did they rent suite next door this time? Or Celgene? Or pretty much any company that attends a show we do? BARDA? Stockpiling contract? CROctober? Pretty much any month for the last 10 years? Now Thermo at a show. Does the CEO actually even know who Pluristem is? Highly doubt it. Much lower level stuff. Or every single trade show that has passed with nothing to show for it? No more rebuttals that others can grow cells more efficiently than us? Did we get that new 750L bioreactor yet? Guess they couldn’t figure out the jump to a bigger size, or you think they would show a picture of one instead of the same size we have seen for many years. Did others figure out how to manufacture MSC’s yet? Where’s the bidding war? Widetrials the victor? Binding agreement with Chinese? CLI half enrolled within two months, with year long follow up finished?
And the biggie. Did I nail the “program” on my call. Funny who came out right away to discredit. Hmmmm.
So much valuable stuff. There was one. The props made to Eich on his call from long ago to pinpoint the substantial decline in price, was in fact, their best post to date.
I think the dance has begun. A suitor has been found and an upward climb has begun. No reason for that bounce from $1.06 back to the $1.10’s, except by design. Especially zero reason to close at $1.18 on a whopping 7k trade. Someone who had all day, jumps in just before close and gets us there. Hilarious.
I fully expect a steadier stream of news, each one bringing us up some, and staying there. How high we may go, depends on the “pros” and how good they actually are. Some may even try to convince us with charts to help the progress. And of course, ATM will become silent, if it hasn’t already.
Can’t stand that ATM. It’s like insider trading without reporting. Having to wait 3 months is ridiculous. Should have to report it with the same requirements as insiders. Could theoretically have an additional 50 million shares sold, with nobody knowing at all. Don’t recall off hand how many shares were registered. But it was a lot.
Then we will get the inevitable dilution. Not a discounted one this time. That one was done last year. Could even get a slight “premium”, depending on what price they can move it to. If we stay below $1.50, we may see that premium. Higher and may be at, or slightly below. But this time they may get a substantially discounted warrant attached, at a substantially lower price, to entice prospective clients/victims.
That is my call for NOvember and DUDecember. What happens after, we will see. Maybe we will at least get the pivotal ARS trial started by year end, as the original twin stated.
All of course, IMO. No charts, no inside info, nada. Just my gut and the knowledge I have attained from watching this thing for so long. And if it does, I will definitely be taking advantage of this one if it goes really well, and allows me to. What anyone else does is up to them. Last raise was such a kick in the nugs, won’t make that mistake again. Feel free to tear me a new one if I’m wrong. If I am, I’d have zero problem admitting it. I’m a grown man, not a kid.
That is probably the best call you ever made. At least when it comes to wasting time. Funny here’s a link to an article on 2 guru chartists, with two different directions on which way the market will move. How can that be? Do they not see the same data? Guess it all comes down to interpretation. One of these professional technicians will be wrong, unless sideways action comes into play for an extended period of time. LMBO. And throw in quants now, and it’s truly a crapshoot. Man vs computer. Who wins. Nobody knows until after the fact.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/godfather-of-chart-analysis-says-damage-done-to-the-stock-market-is-much-much-worse-than-anyone-is-talking-about-2018-10-30
And this isn’t even taking into account all the variables that can change or effect the price of a penny stock. Charts will see it. LMBO.
One single release could move it up or down significantly in an instant. At least most stocks in this space. Manipulation of these types of stocks does indeed happen. Just have a look at the pre dump pump just over a year ago.
Even day traders seem to stay away. Can be seen by the way our stock reacts to news, even ones that appear to be very good. A couple still take their chances trading premarket, only to see the few cent gain turn negative. Zero interest in this stock.
Our 52 week spread has shrunk to pathetic levels. Pretty unique in our space. Even if you timed it perfectly, might see 5% at most. Jokes. Just like charts.
Maybe it’s in our delivery that makes it hard to understand. Maybe this will help. Feel free to read it again after, in character.
Price up. Price down. Maybe up, maybe down. Missed both. Sideways wins. Nyum Nyum
Chart up. Chart down. Chart call bad. Nyum Nyum
Toots bad Capstone. Toots good Pluristem. Nyum nyum
Token analysts good. Nyum Nyum
Financials too hard. Nyum Nyum
Fundamentals found by ratings research good. Nyum Nyum
Management no experience bad. Nyum Nyum
Competition good, but bad. Nyum Nyum
Cookies very good. Nyum Nyum
I knew of no such thing with regards to Caricord. So what you’re saying is we should get a collaboration PR with them too? We should keep an eye out for them at any shows we attend. Hours of one on one time in Zami’s booth to sell their pitch, all with complete privacy with nobody else in sight except at surrounding booths. Our latest deal could have been hammered out in this exact way. And here I thought shows were useless.
I’ve conceded the jump to IC only, for now. I still can see a possibility somehow of them beating us there. Aside from all the new pathways and such, they could probably jump straight into phase 2, complete it, and get some sort of conditional approval. All while we wait years for the first half of our trial gets enrolled.
And you would think that with all the other points that were left as valid, you’d almost think there’d be a downgrade in opinion of management after yet another year. “Ok with management” lasts as long as our buy ratings. At least the next level down. “Not sure” But I’m not a ratings researcher.
Buy/strong buy, even throw in a sell. Just the mere fact that they are watching is good enough for me. It’s called ratings research. So please don’t make fun.
Sure did. But I must admit, you’re the best “ratings researcher” we got, even with the buy/strong buy confusion I helped you to finally understand. World of rating research is quite difficult to navigate. Please keep the board informed if another buy rating comes out.
What other parts aside from Celularity, are you referring to? HCT? Pluristems presentation having the outcomes rather than the actual trial design? Chose a bad CRO? Missed milestones? There was no counterpoint so what should I come back with? Made up ones? That’s your mo sorry. Leave that for the “pros”.
Or are you talking “ok with management”. Got me there. That’s a winner of a point. Kind of a complete disregard to all the points that were agreed on. LMBO
That’s the only thing you have ever said correct. We all know you won’t stop posting here. No matter how many times you’re proven wrong. Congrats.
If that doesn’t take the cake. You researched the ratings reviews? How does one research the “ratings review”? Hopefully you at least checked more than one single site for your in depth fundamental review. They offering a course on that one where you tought charts. Fundamentals-101. LMBO!!! Skip the “reports” themselves, and rely solely on ratings. Let me guess, all of them were a buy or strong buy at one point?
Not sure what you were reading, but yes maybe the Celularity jump may be a stretch. What else was I off on? HCT? Missed Milestones? The fact we put outcomes on presentations, not in the trial design itself.
Since you want to talk credibility, why the contradictory post from this one you wrote before. Post 26853 on the Capstone board. Yelling it too. Sad indeed. So, so sad.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=120520396
“INSTIUTIONS- IT'S LESS THAN RELIABLE TO WITNESS INSTITUTIONAL HOLDING INCREASES AS A BASIS TO BUY OR HOLD THIS STOCK. THE KEY QUESTIONS ARE 1) WHEN DID THEY BUY SHARES AND 2) WHAT DID THEY PAY FOR THEM.
GO PACK 1 YEAR + AGO WHEN INSTITUTIONS WHERE HOLDING OVER 43% OF THE SHARES. THEY GOT IT WRONG AS WITNESSED BY THE WITTLING DOWWN TO 19% OR LESS NOW. SO TO ARE THE RESEARCHERS WHO FLIPPED FLOPPED FROM BUY TO SELL MULTIPLE TIMES DURING THE YEAR.
IF ANYTHING THEIR RECORD IS ABYSSMAL AND COULD BE USED AS A CONTRARY INDICATOR.”
Hey Spidey,
Well we will see what happens with Celularity. Maybe that jump is a stretch. But one thing they have over us is funding to take them to profitability.
You never answered my question. Will the FDA take an outcome stated on a presentation. What is the actual purpose of stating them on the actual design, as opposed to our way? You have stated how these designs take a very long time. Want to get it right. Don’t get do-overs. But then turn around and say it’s fine to have it stated somewhere else. Answer this. Do you think it was a mistake not to put them in the trial design. Can the FDA actually still even take those other results as official?
You know reaching out to Karine would get a token answer. Pointless. But you would think the company at one point in their entire history, would come out and give a real update. Explanations. Anything. They don’t. Ever.
And funny we’ve talked about all those misses before. A year or so later, they’re still misses. Doubling their expected timeframes on some of them, all with ZERO EXPLANATIONS.
Probably their biggest failure is communicating to shareholders. Saying you have made most milestones when in fact, barely got any. Gift themselves millions of shares. Now they just don’t give any timeframes. That’s brilliant. They’re useless and most here know it. Cowards who refuse to face shareholders.
Management is good. Sure.
Here’s the other stocks for comparison that you have posted and their tute numbers. At least pharma companies. If some tutes are there it must be good. Ya right. Penny stocks seem to be your thing. But you don’t gamble.
PSTI 4% tute 2 year high $1.66 sitting at $1.13
ATHX 22% tute 2 year high $2.44 sitting at $1.92
AEMD 18% tute 2 year high $4.69 sitting at $1.06
BCLI 12% tute 2 year high $5 sitting at $3.12.
RNN 6% tute 2 year high $5.10 sitting at $1.16
CYTX 14% tute 2 year high $16.80 sitting at $.35
Those are all that you have looked at aside from STEM and ENDV. How have all of these stocks with their bigger tute percentages worked out for you. What are/were the professional analysts saying about these stocks. Most sitting very near there 52 week low. What were/are “analysts saying about these other companies. Buy? Strong buy. LMBO
You seem to lump analyst’s covering penny stocks with real analysts like Goldman Sachs covering established companies. Yes they upgrade/downgrade and it can actually move the stock. Why? Credibility. Something this company, it’s covering analysts, and others have zero of. And YES. I did just end my sentence with a preposition. Read em and weep.
It’s just too easy!!!
Here we are, our fifth day between $1.11 and $1.13. Just when you think the call to drift to the low &1’s or a bounce up would have covered all possibilities. The dreaded sideways action that was left uncalled, kicks in, rendering both other calls failed. The comedy just doesn’t stop.
You can’t make this stuff up!!!
Here are the facts again in case you missed it or I missed any thoughts other than a couple that were in agreement had. Or in case someone doesn’t want you to see. Don’t need schooling or analysts opinions to see it. All staring at you straight in the face. Especially don’t need a chart.
June 30/18
Cash and equivalents. $32 mil
Liabilities. $8.5 mil
Leaves them with $23.5 left.
Now in their last report, in the last 3 years they have used approximately $9.9 mil of their grants from Horizon and IIA. They were directly receiving $6.4 million from the Horizon,
Grants.
$6.4 million direct from Horizon
$3.3 mil IIA 2016
$1.4 mil IIA 2017
$900 g’s IIA 2018
$12 million total.
Anyone see a pattern to the size of the IIA grants?
That leaves them with $2.1 mil left via grants.
They have a grand total of approximately $25.2 left as of June 30th. And yes a quarter has passed, so maybe bring that down to around $20 mil. With grant money most likely gone already, quarterly cash used will be rising.
They’re going to need cash in the very near future. Could be down to $15 mil by eoy. What impact will that have on the share price?
Keep selling via the ATM? Do they want to add more pressure on the price? What will that do to the size and proceeds of the dilution if/when they pull that trigger.
So here we are, most likely sitting around $20 million left (Depending on ATM usage). A company that refuses to give any guidance, explanations, ridiculous updates that are truly laughable. Our stock narrowing in on their 52 week low.
On Kaki’s turn for the big “update”, he states they used $5.8 mil in cash last quarter. During this same quarter, they realized $1.5 million in grants to offset R&D expense. I showed previously (to those who “read”) that the grant money is or just about gone. Assuming of course, that they’ve used it in the last 4 months since year end.
Now take away the grants and imagine a $7.3 million burn rate with $20 mil in cash. Do we really have enough to take us to the first quarter of 2020 like they stated?
The ATM boosted cash by $2.6 million last quarter. But how long can this continue, especially with a declining share price like we have. Like I said, quite the predicament our great, experienced leaders face.
But yes, Zami deserved that year end raise. Poor guy had t got one since 2011. Only several million free shares. Boohoo. .
You want to understand why our price has now hit our 52 week low, I think I’ve pegged it. That and the fact that nobody in this industry believes anything our management says.
Glad to know someone who “taught” anything related to stocks, uses nothing except token ratings from analysts vying for Pluristem’s business. Can’t even get a report showing how they took financials into account. Because they don’t. Some would even call that blind faith. Even worse than hopes and potential. I’m Don’t need to have any skills to see their gloomy financial situation. Financials don’t matter, only charts.
Then you want to question the only company who ever has, Edison. They’re the only ones at least recently, who give any sort of explanation for their valuation. Not just a token buy, or fictitious strong buy. You’ll be happy to know they had a valuation of $212 mil for Pluristem.
Go Pluristem!!!
We’ve been doing that for many years unfortunately. Next month is always the new hope. Quite fitting the quote from old times... “We’ll get em next month”.
Yes you have stated many tines that you rely on Zzatt for his valuable Tobias quotes for your scientific research. That’s cool. To each their own. But I’m talking strictly financials. A major part of the fundamental equation. I have stated on a few occasions now about the dwindling amount of cash they have, and how they will continue to fund their endeavour. Is this not important for when you may make the leap to jump in? Do you have no concern where they will attain this money. Do you have reports we don’t?
Here’s a quote from Edison’s report. Not entirely sure what conflicts they may have with regards to Pluristem. I seem to recall they are paid by TASE to cover listed companies there. (Don’t quote me on that). But at least it’s not a direct conflict like the other analysts have. Not that conflicts matter of course. $50 million required to get them to the lofty, unlikely to attain, goal of profitability in 2020. So again. Do you have any concern at all? Or are you trying to just keep the fundamentals out of view for everyone to see?
https://www.edisoninvestmentresearch.com/?ACT=18&ID=21209&LANG=
Pluristem ended its fiscal Q318 in 31 March 2018 with an operating loss of $9.0m. R&D spending was the company’s major expense at $6.4m, which was slightly up from previous quarters (Q218: $5.6m, Q118: $4.6m). We assume this increase is associated with the advancement of the Phase III CLI and preparations for the Phase III FNF trial. Our FY18 R&D and SG&A estimates remain unchanged at $22.8m and $10.2m, respectively. We expect the company to require $50m in additional capital ($20m in FY18, $30m in FY19, recorded as illustrative debt) to reach profitability in 2020.
Can you please lead us to what “people” you refer to, and their take on the “fundamentals”. Are the 3 buy ratings you found the source? Are there reports they provided or as long as they say buy, that’s good enough for you? You clearly stated you don’t do financials. Can’t wait to see who you’re “following”. Or are they going to remain secret, or “bought” reports.
Hey Spidey,
Thanks for the reply. Yes Celularity has been brought up several times in the past. Everyone dismissed them without a thought, and would appear you seem to as well. I don’t. Their data from DFU is supposed to be released sometime in November, and that is why it’s an important issue again.
I understand DFU is a different study, but all relevant to PAD and IC. Hence the similar outcome measures as you listed. I am not talking about a potential off label like you suggest. I’m talking about a jump right into IC or PAD or both.
I truly don’t think it’s too much of a stretch. If their primary or secondary outcomes directly related to IC/PAD are stellar, could they not then receive one of the many new fast track designations that are out there? Breakthrough, Fast track, etc. With all these possibilities, I don’t find it much of a stretch to make this jump, considering the severity and unmet need of the disease. And with the protectional agenda of the U.S these days, which company would they rather see provide this treatment?
With regards to IC endpoints, I go straight to the source for that info. If you have been reading for the last couple of weeks, there have been many a false claim brought to the board from bad links to incorrect sites. 910,000 insider buys and 40+% institutional holders to name a couple.
If you want to search old presentations, a simple search on google of Pluristem presentations will bring all the oldies out. Add a year to the search if you want to be more specific. But a company presentation is just that. Why aren’t they listed on the actual trial? I don’t know either. Seems to me they should have been there. An oversight? Intentional? Inexperience? Who knows. But they put that single outcome measure on the trial design for a reason. Or does putting it in your company presentation or NR good enough for the FDA. Can those outcomes not shown on the design, officially be used? Maybe you can shed some light on why these measures are stated on trial designs.
You even stated that Celularity has a good trial design. Why? Is it because they included al the outcome measures you provided the board, in their design instead of a presentation? Your commentary on each of them is an attempt to try and show irrelevance to what Pluristem is trying to achieve. Time to amputation is directly related to PAD, but all of these outcomes are relevant to all 3 outcomes, since they have many similar attributes. That is why the outcome measures that Celularity covered in their actual good design, covers all that we have in both IC and PAD. Of course you can only find one similarity with our IC trial design. We only have 1.
But again with all this, what is the significance of having it in the design, or the company presentation. I showed one because that’s what’s shown officially, on CT website.
So you are correct that I don’t like the vagueness of the IC trial design from Pluristem. Comparing the 2 of them, it’s like night and day. Great experienced management, poor inexperienced management. Great design, poor design. But what would you expect when the head of HR came from Elbit Vision Systems. Employee knowledge of robotic vision system or complex world of biotech are interchangeable. Knowledge of experience, terminology, anything biotech related is not important. Zami himself probably sat in on interviews to make sure we hire the “right” people.
HCT recruitment is slow? If that’s not the understatement of the year. Study started Feb 8/17. They have 6 “active” sites trying to recruit 24 patients. A measly 4 from each site needed. Pluristem is the ONLY one responsible to the delays. Did they pick another horrific CRO like they did with the IC trial. Do they have the experience to know of a good CRO, or the importance of one. Did they get “sold” on the one that promised the fastest? Did they make the criteria so difficult that finding patients that meet the criteria difficult to find? All to get the most likely population to benefit from it, all at the expense of making it painstakingly slow.
When you search old presentations to find IC outcomes, have a look at the Jan 2017 one . It states data readout HCT 2H17. Here are some other “milestones” in case you forgot. And the link for you follows.
Contract with US government for ARS 2H17
Initiation of pivotal study ARS 2H17
Preclinical data readout Fukushima 1H17. We did get it June of 2018. Woohooo maybe this caused Zami to state “they made most milestones”
Preclinical data readout NYBC 1H17.
http://www.pluristem.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Pluristem-January-2017.pdf
Getting EAP status is probably pretty hard to these days. No rights groups calling for access to unapproved drugs or “right to try” calls. Sorry but don’t see that as any huge accomplishment. There are risks associated with it as I’m sure you know. And it’s them trying to recoup manufacturing costs via Widetrials that our inexperienced team is going where no biotech has gone before. Why do pretty much all other companies pass on this, is the real question.
No surprise you are still “good” with management. No need to go further on that one.
I’m not sure what you are asking me to search exactly on google. I search quite well. If I needed to find a past company presentation, I know just a simple search of “Pluristem presentation” would bring them all up. Anything I search, I look to multiple sources to corroborate the facts. Otherwise we would be thinking there were 910,000 insider buys in the last year, and a 40% stake by tutes in Pluristem. An extreme miss on both counts.
But please what should I search. Pluristem’s presentation to find IC outcome measures or Clinical Trials website. Which one is more credible?
I did and have already thanks. With actual proof. If something’s at a buck, you call for $2 and it makes it to $1.50, you would say that’s a win. It’s not. Never once do your calls make it where you “think” they will go. You selectively omit the rest of your “calls”. That’s why you don’t show the post number. Then you go and change them from how the price is acting in the meantime. Then you’re wrong again. It’s astonishing. I have yet to see a single poster come and back you up. Not one. Why???
What’s even worse, is you make these calls and dont do it yourself. Just be ready to back the truck up when the “technicals” change. You should go all in. Every cent you have, give er. Hopefully you let us know when you take the plunge, like your two bad dives already. Will definitely mark that post.
What you don’t understand is you can see all of what you state without charts at all. That, I think is the funniest thing of all. Just follow the stock for a while and you can make the same basic calls you do. No news, down. News, up at beginning, down by end of day. Every 10 cent increment is a new psychological level to get through. You somehow need charts to see all of this. Not rocket science.
Selling at $1.29 rather than buying, would have been the better call sorry. Even selling once we broke $1.20 like you called, even though we didn’t get to where your call really was, would have paid off. But somehow you manage not only to miss every call, you lose money on each of them. Brilliant TA and even better losses.
Funny they were in agreement with the financial situation. You said you don’t look at that so I see why you didn’t mention it.
I made counters to the other 2 points they brought up. Maybe we will get a stick figure climbing the graph of our ONLY measured outcome, maximal walking distance. May even draw him with something in his pocket. For extra oomph of course. And all the “extra data” has helped us so much in the past when they “released” it.
And our inexperienced leaders have decided to break the norm that pretty much ever experienced leader in their field does. Try to recoup manufacturing costs from EAP. Big gamble don’t you think. We can be Widetrials fist customer. No desperation in trying to get anything they can to help their financial dilemma. All to maybe get a couple mil tops. If it does pay manufacturing costs only, many couple hundred g’s. But anything to keep their ability to pay themselves for another quarter will suffice.
_
Like I said before, I’m here for the gamble. Not an investment in any sense of the word. Hoping for a heart on the river. My 2 of hearts will make the flush and assure victory!!!
Let’s see how your latest call works out. Looks like we will open higher. But don’t worry, your call has a pretty good chance of success.
“But I still don't trust the old and technically expect a break below to the $1.00
area soon. “
A lot less than the 5 1/2 years we took no? And Celularity obviously took it over from someone else, since they’re a “startup”. Charts saw this I know, so no worries. No correlation to our near 32 month lows. Hopes and potential is the motto for Pluristem, and what most here rely on.
It’s pretty obvious you don’t talk financials. It hurts some to look at all those big numbers. Much easier and peaceful to think using hopes and potential are the best way to invest. Financials aren’t that big of a deal anyways. Charts take those into account anyways. Scientists too. Pretty much any variable, the chart knows, before anyone else to boot.
I would suggest looking at the lesser well known TA tool, the red ribbon. An imortant indicator that will tell you when a chartist is blowing gas. Right now, the red ribbon is in extreme territory, flapping violently in the wind. . Avoid their TA at all cost.
So Spidey, would be great to hear your thoughts on Celularity’s awaiting results, Diabetic Foot Ulcer trial. The one with 3 primary outcome measures and 13 secondary. Far cry from our single measure in our IC trial, maximum walking distance.
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02264288?term=Celularity&rank=5
Seems as though they have covered all their bases and then some. How hard of a stretch is it to think their product could be suitable to treat CLI, if most or all of their measures are met?
Also too, you thoughts on them not being able to enrol 24 patients since Feb 2017, in their HCT trial? I remember when they expanded to Israeli sites, you looked at it as a positive that results could be looking good. In hindsight, pretty easy to see it was because enrolment is a joke.
Are you still thinking management is “ok” and still think because Zami’s run other companies before, should be “ok”.
All I did was go by the burn rate that Kaki stated for the last quarter. And like I said, from their quarterlies, I have shown their direct portion of the grant monies will most likely have been all used up, which we will see in a couple of months. The same portion in which we were able to reduce burn rate by about $1.5 mil. So an increase to approximately $7.3 mil per quarter, is quite daunting with $20 mil left in the coffers.
Widetrials is great isn’t it. It’s Pluristem’s management feeling the beads of sweat forming from their financial situation. Trying to desperately look for ways to get some funds. Funny pretty much everyone in the industry avoid reimbursement for EAP. All of them with decades upon decades of experience. But our two beloved rookies, are going to try and be ground breakers.
Kept their “technology” to themselves for all these years, but decide now is the time to try and cash in on it. Once others have caught up and surpassed us in manufacturing. Funny the picture from their presentations, has the same 75 L bioreactor they’ve had for many years. How come they haven’t scaled up to 2000+ L like their competitors have? They never did make the next size jump to the 800 L if I remember correctly. Wonder if Thermo can do it.
I’m sorry but these guys seem to be getting desperate. Like I said, with cash being able to get them only half way through next year. Twins weren’t able to get a partner before on their own terms when they weren’t desperate. But I’m sure they will soon, just will be on the partners terms, not ours. Sell out CLI for $5 mil upfront, and single digit royalties. That’s the size of deal our goon squad could handle, and somehow spin it to sound amazing. Desperate times call for desperate measures. No way Zami’s going to invoke cash savings contingency plan. He just got a raise.
Here’s an update for you. For some reason it keeps getting buried. Care to take a stab at it.
And as usual, I’m not expecting any comments from the beliebers. They tend to ignore facts and rely on quotes from Tobias for their “investments”. “Tobias” “Scientists” “no bad news”
June 30/18
Cash and equivalents. $32 mil
Liabilities. $8.5 mil
Leaves them with $23.5 left.
Now in their last report, in the last 3 years they have used approximately $9.9 mil of their grants from Horizon and IIA. They were directly receiving $6.4 million from the Horizon,
Grants.
$6.4 million direct from Horizon
$3.3 mil IIA 2016
$1.4 mil IIA 2017
$900 g’s IIA 2018
$12 million total.
Anyone see a pattern to the size of the IIA grants?
That leaves them with $2.1 mil left via grants.
They have a grand total of approximately $25.2 left as of June 30th. And yes a quarter has passed, so maybe bring that down to around $20 mil. With grant money most likely gone already, quarterly cash used will be rising.
They’re going to need cash in the very near future. Could be down to $15 mil by eoy. What impact will that have on the share price?
Keep selling via the ATM? Do they want to add more pressure on the price? What will that do to the size and proceeds of the dilution if/when they pull that trigger.
So here we are, most likely sitting around $20 million left (Depending on ATM usage). A company that refuses to give any guidance, explanations, ridiculous updates that are truly laughable. Our stock narrowing in on their 52 week low.
On Kaki’s turn for the big “update”, he states they used $5.8 mil in cash last quarter. During this same quarter, they realized $1.5 million in grants to offset R&D expense. I showed previously (to those who “read”) that the grant money is or just about gone. Assuming of course, that they’ve used it in the last 4 months since year end.
Now take away the grants and imagine a $7.3 million burn rate with $20 mil in cash. Do we really have enough to take us to the first quarter of 2020 like they stated?
The ATM boosted cash by $2.6 million last quarter. But how long can this continue, especially with a declining share price like we have. Like I said, quite the predicament our great, experienced leaders face.
But yes, Zami deserved that year end raise. Poor guy had t got one since 2011. Only several million free shares. Boohoo. .
You want to understand why our price has now hit our 52 week low, I think I’ve pegged it. That and the fact that nobody in this industry believes anything our management says.