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.
Rumor or truth?
Putting in a GTC “sell/close” (depending on your broker) and setting a high per share price can PREVENT your shares from being loaned for short transactions?
I’m starting to! They REALLY need to refresh their social media profiles
Sayonara, shorts!
After stock lost around 33% in 2 days DURING AUA—when many no doubt saw the virtual silence from CELZ about its activities during the conference as a red flag—they MUST get out the official word of the things that Eslifesvr shared tonight...on TUESDAY. Spring out of the conference and never look back!
Thank you!
I’ll stick to substance and avoid desperate personal jabs. Happy to be refuted. I’m waiting
15:1
100K share SELLS outnumbered 100K share BUYS in just the time from about 1-4 today. Can someone kindly explain to me how this portends STRENGTH?
Actually, I have over 100K shares invested—but am mad as $%#* at this tiptoe through the tulips approach. Down 33% from recent highs—and at a time when it should be SWELLING (no pun intended).
I would presume that the company from Denmark featured in Newsweek might take issue with what “CELZ owns.”
Isn’t it just a LITTLE odd that Newsweek (which has a large presence in the US) writes about a firm using this technology in DENMARK, but doesn’t mention a PEEP about CELZ (an American company), which is PRESUMABLY ahead of the Danish firm in terms of R & D?
1-2% up. Wooooohoooo. Especially after it sucked canal water Friday in what should have been the beginning of an epic rise outta the pink sheets
Pump and dump. Plain and simple
“It’s gonna be months, maybe years” until this is ready to market and monetize. That’s what they need to just come out and say—otherwise get after it already!
Wouldn’t you think there would be reports coming from the conference—if not actual live feeds—if CaverStem is as big as they suggest? This would be a no-brainer investment that anyone with two nickels to rub together would throw every bit of money he had at.
Meantime, while they are engaging in all this cloak-and-dagger secret slow-roll, other companies (such as the one from Denmark, I think) are featured in Newsweek: not a PEEP about CELZ there either. Smdh.
I’ve read them. What I DO know is that if CaverStem is ANYWHERE near as promising as suggested, the marketing and monetization should already be in effect. Hell just on the prospect of revenues this thing should be north of 5¢. It isn’t—which tells me that there is more to the story than is being told (and if it were good, it wouldn’t contribute to the downward drag)...
Fair points—but management is doing NOTHING to boost this either!
How long did MEDS trade at lows and how low before it popped to $2+ and was bought out for ~$1.25/share?
MEDS was Ichim’s prior venture, unless I am mistaken.
DISGUSTED. Tailspin, treading water, wtf gives?
What did Gershman say and when did he say it? That’s al we really need to know at this point.
Just Google “twitter search” and then enter “celz 10q”
Happy reading ??
Again, I want someone to explain exactly how they plan to monetize this in a proprietary manner—that will result in CELZ getting $ from each procedure performed.
I contend that their failure to do so is the main reason why the stock continues to languish: if CaverStem is all it seems, this revolution should ALREADY be exploding. Don’t you think analysts understand the industries and financials of the stocks within their sectors. There is no way something this big could, if true, “fly under the radar.
Bear in mind that I want this thing to go up as bad as the next guy—but I also need to understand the fundamentals and how they plan to promote this thing massively and systematically.
Think through the logic of your post: if this has been known for “a couple years,” don’t you think that the PPS of this revolutionary treatment, with the ability to transform the entire ED landscape, would be much higher than 1-2¢? Someone somewhere isn’t believing it.
OK. So I guess I’ll just continue getting in at or below .02 and riding it between there and .03 daily/weekly
Company MUST explain clearly how it plans to MONETIZE CaverStem: courts have made it clear that procedures/processes are NOT covered by patent protections. How is CaverStem different? How will they monetize it in a proprietary way?
I’ll bite. If what you’re saying is true, this stock should already be over $1 based on projected income streams. Instead it has tanked: 50¢/share in late 2017, 25x+ DOWN since then. How does one explain these factors in conjunction?
Company MUST explain clearly how it plans to MONETIZE CaverStem: courts have made it clear that procedures/processes are NOT covered by patent protections. How is CaverStem different? How will they monetize it in a proprietary way?