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.
Bigtoe,1963,
Just what is it you "told me so" about?
I only find one post to me from you and all you said was.
1. DNAG is dead
2. You would buy back in at .0004
Perhaps you misread my posts. I would not suggest anyone buy this stock based on the information provided by Sam and Detonate. I would also not suggest anyone buy this stock based on your reasoning.
As I pointed out, Detonate and Sam could indeed be right! They based their position on the facts available and I do not discount that reasoning. IF they are correct, DNAG is not dead. personally I shall wait. IMHO
SAM, Detonate, etc.
After seeing the information on the possible FSDLS buyout of DNAG.
I must admit that it is POSSIBLE that FSDLS DID buy DNAG's IP, as the speculative scenario I posted suggests.
I HOPE you are right as I bought most of my shares prior to the 20-1 reverse split. DOH
Correct me if I am missing anything, the evidence seem to come down to this,
1. The statements made by Gannon (that he with other investors wanted to buy the DNAG IP and was friendly to shareholders). I think Gannnon was sincere in wanting to include current investors.
2. The fact that DoggieDNA, forensics tools for police and other professionals, and ancestry products are still being sold and further research seems to be done on the products.
I can see some merit to this line of thought.
But,I think it is only fair to view the other side of the coin.
a. Gannon seemed sincere in his desires... that's just my opinion and immaterial.
b. What he wanted to do and what the other FSDLS investors desired to do in the end, are unknown.
c. There is no evidence whatsoever that the deal took place,
No financials, no contract, no communication, it is speculation.
As for various ancestry technology products are being sold and the technology being advanced.
a. This is solid factual information. Useful but no proof.
As Porgi Tirebiter pointed out
"Has anyone considered the possibility that Dutchess has marketed, and or licensed the I.P?" I had.
Personally I can think of other senaros as well.
So, I must also admit that it is POSSIBLE that FSDLS DID NOT buy DNAG, as the speculative scenario I posted suggests.
ALL the evidence is purely circumstantial and speculative in both your views and porgi tirebiters, the only difference is one idea adds the remarks by Gannon. Which as I pointed out is lacking in evidence.
Should someone invest in DNAG, on Gannons word alone, with the only evidence being that the Ancestry is being sold? Risk aversion comes to mind.
I am not saying that those who believe that FSDLS bought DNAG are wrong, only that I personally would not buy shares on this evidence,... without further information. If this were circumstantial evidence in a court case, I think it would be thrown out before it court.
I am someone who wants to believe but I would not buy shares or recommend it to a friend or to those a board like this. (without further proof)
The above statements do not disprove the idea of FSDLS purchase of DNAG IP, but neither do the positive aspects prove the purchase.
IMHO
Difference of opinion is what makes horses race (twain).
Cuda,
One of the reasons for my inquiries was that no information was available, no Dannon to call or e-mail,... no address or phone # for FSDLS, no (new) contract to view, no financials.
I came to this board only a few times since DNAG went out of business (whats the point) so missed this FSDLS conversation prior. Hence my inquiry into further details.
Cuda,
Thank you.
HMMMM, I had thought it was suggested that there was a change to their pipeline info.
If the home page redirecting visitors to the new ancestory is the only change, it would seem that 2 of the pieces of evidence become one.
Ancestry being used and the website changes are the same information.
Sam, Detonate,
Thanks for the help,again, the list of patents is helpful.
Frogdreaming, thank you for answering my question.
You are correct, they are not new patents, I should have said, recently approved patents.
The patents would go to FSDLS is all I was looking for. IF. As you said datonate " any patent activity is a positive indication". Can't ask for a more positive indication than "approval" from the Patent Office."(IF") FSDLS bought DNAG.
Their value does not seem to be important to our discussion.
As proof that FSDLS bought DNAG? Personally I think we need proof that correspondance took place after the sale of DNAG or something more compelling for it to fit into the puzzle. Even corrspondance would not be definative, but suggestive.
It would seem to me that SOME type of correspondance must take place during the final process but maybe not. They post some corrspondance on their website. You can navigate the website if you are interested. (hate that place. Typical government website, navigation is a nightmare, everything you DON"T want, right at your fingertips).
I have only 1 more question
Do you know the changes to DNAG's website? Ann did not answer.
Thank you again everyone for giving me all the information and doing all the work.
Yea, I admit it. I'm lazy.
Cuda,
"99% of patents don't make money" and other comments
I can well believe it, seems like every time I do a search on google, some patent application comes up.
Point well taken and it is a good reminder of what we are NOT talking about so we don't get off topic. It is not my intention to encourage new investors with our speculation.
Our discussion has nothing to do with the VALUE of DNAG or of it's "possible" buyer. Their only VALUE to me at the moment is concerning our current discussion.
So they are blind for speculating on the gathered information (perhaps over hopeful) but you are intelligent for thinking of buying back in at .0004 on a company you think will delisted at any time?
Perhaps suggesting to investors, that you think a buy in at .0004 just for a "pop" might be a good idea.
Don't see it, but congrats on your profits.
Thanks everyone for the help.
Question. IF these speculations turn out to be true. What happens to the two new patents. Are they part of the DNAG IP spoken about in the document, or do they revert to the inventors because they came about after the deal was made?
Florida Gray Fox, Thank you. Might I suggest the term, "logical speculation" rather than just logic.
SAM, Detonate, ANN, florida grayfox and anyone else interested.
Let me try to follow the logic here.
A group of investors (FSDLS) was interested in buying DNAG by DEC. 2008. I am assuming they are an investment group not traded on any exchange (no SEC filings) and perhaps not too large (no website).
The deal did not go through (DNAG was not purchased by DEC. 2008.)
JAN, FEB, MARCH 2009
1. DNAG closes its doors and announces it is out of business.
2. Gannon (the largest investor with over a 5% stake) states he wants to keep DNAG in business and is looking for investors.
3. Dannon makes the following statements
a. He has found 21 investors, plus himself and another investment group (FSDLS).
b. I received authorization, today, to begin sharing the business plan with credible investors, and I'm already sending it out."
c. " I believe they are friendly to the interests of the shareholders. Saving DNAPrint Genomics is what this is all about."
d. He is upset that frogdreaming posts the old FSDLS agreement.
4. Gannon stops posting on the board, no new information for about a year from him or FSDLS.
I can only envision the following scenario from the above (if we are to believe that FSDLS and gannon bought DNAG and current investors are still involved).
1. Gannon finds 21 investors to invest in the purchase DNAG IP.
2. He contacts FSDLS or they contact him and make a deal. (they were already interested)
3. The deal is similar to the one FSDLS had in 2008 (upset by frogdreamings post) but with additional investors and a deal that made it go through (whereas the 2008 agreement did not)
4. Additional language was added to make it friendly to current investors.
5. The deal went through.
You are encouraged to believe this scenario because Sam and others found....
1. DNAG name was used on new site to sell ancestry products.
2. Updated website (found by ANN i believe).
3. DNAG has yet to be delisted
4.. ETC. (Sam would you post another list of items you think support this buyout)
(ann would you mind posting the changes you noted on the website, you have paid the most attention to that subject).
So we waited for a year for any information. None has come.
Cuda requests Florida Gray fox (a private investigator I think I read) find information on the FSDLS deal.
Florida Grayfox, you would do us an invaluable service if you could find this information and settle the issue once and for all.
SO, do I have the gist of your thinking? What did I miss, what did I get wrong.
NOTE: new investors and visitors. DNAG has closed it's doors, moved it's equipment out and is no longer in business. (as stated by DNAG) The above is purely speculation (ONLY). I am not endorsing any of these ideas, just hoping to understand the position of other investors on IHUB and trying to keep an open mind. Nor do I recommend investment in DNAG. Do your own DD.
Frogdreaming,
Thank you for posting the entire document.
SAM1993, Detonate,
Thanks
Sam I am especially greatful to you for consistantly doing searches for new information and facts. Few have spent that much time and effort here.
I think that ALL information regarding DNAG should be presented. It's the whole point of a discussion board.
Whatever the deal is with Gannon and FSDLS, it MAY yet play a part for current investors and needs further light.
If DNAG rises from the dead, fantastic. I want to understand how and why.
If it is delisted, I want to learn as much as I can about EVERYTHING that has happened, so I don't make the same mistakes next time.
My personal opinion of Gannon is that he seemed sincere and believeable but I'm not about to base further investment on my opinion of someone I don't know personally. Facts vs speculation.
So, DOES anyone have any more FACTS to add on the DNAG-FSDLS deal? Or did my post sum up all the "real information" or lack thereof.
Detonate,
Speaking of finding facts.
I assume that when you talk about DNAG still doing business, that the only way this is possable is through the FSDLS/Gannon deal. Considering DNAG being was forced out of business without funding.
The only information I have found on FSDLS seems to be in the posts here by Frogdreaming and Danial Gannnon.
Frogdreaming posted a proported snippet he says is from the business plan of FSDLS. Post 81364
"The listing of capital expenditures includes the payment of $200,000 to Dutchess Private Equities Fund, Ltd. This is the payment as outlined in the attached term sheet between FSDLS and Dutchess. Dutchess is currently the largest creditor and totally secured by all of the assets of the corporation. The $200,000 payment is for all of the debt and lien position they have on DNAPrint. By purchasing Dutchess position FSDLS become the superior lien holder and now protect the licensing agreement between DNAPrint and FSDLS. There is also a $260,000 payment to DLA Piper, patent attorneys. This is an outstanding obligation of DNAPrint and is part of the consideration of the licensing agreement. By virtue of the having the Dutchess position FSDLS will also have a lien on all IP of DNAPrint, including patents that are in process."
From the wording it appears the payments have already been paid to Dutchess and that FSDLS now takes over the position Dutchess once had and now has a lien on all DNAG intelectual property including all patents.
Frogdreaming did not post the rest of the business plan, (that I can find) and he did not post a link to this information or state how he got it, so we don't know what the proported business plan states they will do with DNAG.
Thats it, I find no other factual or proported documents on the FSDLS deal.
The only other information from sources close to FSDLS are those statements made by Gannon himself.
He posted
"It's not necessarily the end. There hasn't been a bankruptcy, and there are more than a dozen investors who are now interested in saving DNAPrint. Part of the plan is to buy Dutchess' stake in the company. I received authorization, today, to begin sharing the business plan with credible investors, and I'm already sending it out."
This agrees with the post by Frogdreamings in that it suggests that the deal went/was going through.
Concerning the business plan for FSDLS, the only thing I find from Gannon is a response Gannon made to Porgi Tirebitter in which porgi said ("FSDLS is not about reviving DNAG, it is about discarding it.")
to which Dannon responded in post 81356
"I have chosen to work with this specific group precisely because I believe they are friendly to the interests of the shareholders and the company. Saving DNAPrint Genomics is what this is all about. There is nothing nefarious that I have seen, or inferred, nothing whatsoever. "
Everything else I have found is speculation on the above posts or posts like them. There may be other documents posted but I have not found them. (not an ihub member so hard to search).
Sorry about the length here, but finally to the point.
Does anyone here have a link to real documents that concern FSDLS, the deal, the plan etc.
None of the above is factual, as no proof is provided of statements made. Lots of speculation but no facts.
Please no responses of "DNAG is out of business" posts. I know that, it is a fact, but does nothing to give FACTS about FSDLS that I am putting under discussion.
CUDA426,
I can't find any information on FSDLS. Do you happen to remember where you found this information?
NATURES WAY,
There are certainly a lot of questions to which we can only speculate on. One of the things I wonder about is, why on earth would a company that is "out of business", update their website?
There are still those here that believe business is being done because the name DNAG is still being used.
"And those people are being deceived. They are being manipulated by dishonest and unethical voices who don't want the truth to be disseminated."
REALLY, decieved, imagine that in the markets. Manipulated? No, they are being decieved by themselves by not studying the stock. I see no one here trying to minipulate the stock. A few overly hopeful that DG will save the day but....
During the pump and dump, every other post said that DNAG was out of business and if you can be minipulated or decieved by that you deserve it. (I never objected to CUDA stating DNAG was out of business)
"Stock manipulation is illegal."
Really, I didn't know that. LOL
There is NO stock minipulation involved!!
The post by regulars have been factual! Matters for debate. (at least they think so). They state that patents have been issued, DNAG forensic tools being used etc. and therefor should be allowed as discussion on board. Debate them fine, prove them wrong, but unless they break the rules, the moderator should stay out of the discussion.
If you are talking about the pump and bumpers, they are only praying on themselves. A few bought low and sold high, the rest timed it wrong and their losses went to the winners. It's a stupid game they play but their choice and in which the SEC does not get involved. (To bad for investors).
"Signing up as a moderator does not preclude a person from exercising their moral prerogatives."
It does preclude immoral preogatives.
"This in not an investment. Since all of the assets, the personnel, the management and the business office are gone, it is just a shell. Anyone trying to manipulate it by luring innocent investors into a defunct shell is operating a scam. Anyone who wishes the moderator to stay out of their way while trying to scam innocent investors is not playing above board. The moderator has every right to discourage such behavior"
It is a publicly traded stock on the stock exchange and until delisted IS an investment, proven by the fact that it trades. Also proven by the fact that some scummy pump n dumpers made nice profits and other pump n dumpers lost.
It is not a shell YET, if it were it would be for sale. show me the listing.
Show me in these posts where I tried to lure, manipulate anyone. Right, there are none, accordingly,no reason for the moderator to discourage me. My motives and ethics ARE above board, which is more than I can say for you when you lie about my character.
The moderator was discouraging investment on his own board, that is unethical. I do not believe that is on purpose especially since he removed the post.
Cuda,
Thank you for removing your post-it headline.
Certainly I hope no serious investor buys into DNAG as a serious investment.
I am pleased that you wish to help serious investors stay away and was perhaps to hard on you if your motives were worthy.
Heres a solution that does exactly what you suggest and exactly what I suggest also.
Replace that post-it with the old one which states DNAG is out of business (the closed for business one) That way visitors will know right from the first post. After all it is the ONLY information a serious investor needs to know to stay away.
Then let the chips (posts) fall where they may.
Take care
CUDA,
I was not saying DNAG was in business.
You miss my point. DNAG may be out of business but it is still "A" company. Until it distributes ALL its assets it will still be traded on the markets. Love it, hate it, it is still here for traders to invest in. They may be out of business but investors could have reciently made hundreds of % in profit on their trades.
It is obvious that they went out of business. Anyone reading the posts here would know that. You however are a moderator only, not someone who should discourage investment.
There are still those here that believe business is being done because the name DNAG is still being used. Dispite Frogs statments that DNAG no longer exists, it does, it trades! Discussion continues.
Perhaps if the pump n dumpers get it high enough, some old timers can get some money back. It is not YOUR place to decide.
For these and other reasons, It is your place to enforce the rules of the board not to persuade.
"Then they bragged about what they did the next day on their board. This is not the first time we have been targeted like this."
You act as if you are upset that someone made money on the stock!!
A stock board you moderate. HEY everyone, don't make money here, we want to go out of business without anyone making a profit
OLD/NEW patents are NEW patents!
Looking strictly at the patent information itself and not other aspects of DNAG, I do not see why you posted that they filed for them long ago. Why is this important enough to post-it to the top of the Board.
The fact that they filed for the two Patents back in in 01 and 02 is unimportant. May Patents take this kind of time to go through unless a great deal of money is invested to keep the patent process up (money which DNAG did not have).
They are/were important because.
1. They were the scientific basis for the business model on which DNAG was based.
2. They prove that their methods were unique (otherwise they would not be patentable.)
3. Anyone who uses the methods in business would be subject to royalties.
They are strange in that they were issued to a company (we are told)that does not exist.
Your posts are strange in that they all try to stop people from investing. Your JOB is to "moderate" posts by members of IHUB so that they obey the rules. Not influence them to buy or sell. If you wish to "save" people from DNAG, stop pretending to "moderate", QUIT and join the discussion.
Bid .0005 Ask .0015
Is there anyone on this board that went to the shareholders meeting and can confirm frogs statements?
Porgie, please reread my post.
I did not make a mistake. I said there was "activity" on the patent applications. DNAG is keeping up with their applications already filed.
I did not say the patent was new! Frog had stated there was no activity which is false.
goldenstone
There has been activity from the company in regards to keeping up with their current patents applications. The latest example was just a few months ago, See post #80642
olderthanyou, I don't know why we have the price increase but here are some possible reasons.
1. M2GEN opened this month
Does anyone have anything besides spectulation concerning Dnaprint and M2GEN?
2. BioServe, DNA Print to Develop Ovarian Cancer Dx to ID Best Chemo Responders
March 12, 2008
According to BioServe, “validation is now occurring towards [developing] a PGx application,” called Ovanome, that will be launched in the first quarter of 2009.
3. Buying on the momentum
From Ihub Momentum Players board.
Posted by: rodneys Date: Friday, January 23, 2009 9:21:32 AM
In reply to: None Post # of 348788
dnag.pk (DNAPrint Genomics, Inc)
Last Sale: 0.0007
Big news coming???
jkids,
If I recall, the agreement with Harvard was to expire April 30th 2008 with an option to renew for 3 years. The 13th Congress of the European Hematology Association piece I posted was dated June 12-15, 2008.
This implys that they renewed their agreement. If not they presented on a product that was discontinued.
I would like an answer to your question as well but that's all the information I have and DNAG is not talking, so....
Good luck to everyone
Thanks Ann, Preciouslife, dg, sam and the rest who post useful information here.
just looking at the bid/ask on Ihub graph.
Bid .ooo2
Ask 1.01
Wouldn't that be nice
jkid,
PT-401 JUNE 12-2008
13th Congress of the European Hematology Association, June 12-15, 2008
printable version
Title IN VITRO AND IN VIVO PROPERTIES OF PT-401, A NOVEL ERYTHROPOIETIN FUSION PROTEIN
Authors J. Sytkowski,1 J.Y. Jeong,1 K.L. Davis,1 A.L. Socha,1 H.J. Gomez2
Address 1Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, BOSTON, MA; 2DNAPrint Pharmaceuticals, Inc., SARASOTA, FL, USA
Reference Haematologica 2008: 93(s1):117 Abs.0288
Text of the Abstract Background and Aims. Recombinant human erythropoietin (rhEpo, epoetin) is widely used for correction of anemia due to chronic kidney disease and other conditions. Modified forms of rhEpo and other erythropoiesis stimulating agents (ESAs) with higher efficacy and longer half-life have been and continue to be developed to overcome rhEpo’s short in vivo half-life. Previously, we described a novel Epo fusion protein, PT-401, comprising identical head-to-tail repeats and a short linker. We now report that PT-401 exhibits unique in vitro characteristics and enhanced in vivo activity in mice compared to rhEpo. Methods. PT-401 was expressed in Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells stably transfected with a mammalian expression vector containing the PT-401 cDNA. We used quantitative immunoblotting analysis with the monoclonal anti-Epo antibody AE7A5 to identify and quantify PT-401 protein in the cell culture supernatant. Highly purified PT-401 was obtained by sequential column chromatography. The interaction of PT-401 with the Epo receptor (EpoR) was characterized using radioiodinated PT-401 and BaF3 cells stably expressing the human EpoR (BaF3/huEpoR). Results. The amount of PT-401 secreted into protein-free cell culture medium of cloned CHO cells varied between 4 and 40 mg/L. Clones producing PT-401 with the optimal glycosylation were identified based upon mobility in SDS-PAGE and isoelectric focusing, based upon the observation that the extent of glycosylation of Epo correlates with the in vivo half-life. The specific biological activity of purified PT-401 measure by in vitro bioassay was similar to that of freshly produced PT-401 in the cell culture supernatant, demonstrating that the biological activity of PT-401 was preserved during the purification process. PT-401 exhibited specific, saturable binding to the EpoR. The equilibrium dissociation constant (Kd) of PT-401/EpoR interaction was approximately 4 nM, higher than that for rhEpo (0.14 nM, determined in the same experiment), consistent with longer-acting ESAs. The specific activity of PT-401 determined by in vitro bioassay was lower than that of rhEpo, reflecting the higher Kd, also consistent with other longer-acting ESAs. Importantly, PT-401 increased the mean hematocrit of mice to significantly higher levels compared to rhEpo in all injection schemes tested (three injections with 300 IU/kg or 100 IU/kg, a single injection with 100 IU/kg), demonstrating the superior in vivo activity of PT-401. Conclusions. PT-401 exhibits in vitro characteristics consistent with a very long-acting ESA and an in vivo biological activity superior to that of rhEpo, suggesting important therapeutic advantages.
super-precious,
great posts, thank you for refreshing the usefullness of this board.
chiggah, Good point, couldn't agree more.
Should be some interesting days ahead.
Good luck to all.
Those 200 posts were made by investors who saw great charts. They posted because of the charts and true the large rise today was because of those posts.
But the action that brought it about was a raise in the ask of a high amount from all MMs based on---no prospects for the company, bashing posts and no news. That was yesterday.
Problem is there were no positive posts on DNAG. No pumping. The boards have been bashing it for months, with good reason. Posts are down not up.
If you had been watching this board for long enough you would find nite (often in trouble for it) and others manipulating s/p here.
But whatever, guess we are mincing words, as you said, pump and dump will be the result now for the new investors.
Not pumped, that would imply that someone was promoting the stock in order to raise the price.
The stock price went up without any fraudulant information being given.
This is manipulation by the MM's (they raised the price on no news) Or perhaps their is news comming out.
But not pump and dump (no one pumped).
bigdrive99,
Interesting bit of math!
Preciouslife1,
Thanks for the many thoughtful posts. The penny stocks are indeed risky, you place your bets and you take your chances.
The fantastic potential of DNAG had my hopes high but I never forgot this is penny world.
It was MY investment, I did the DD and I believed in the science and management.
If they recieve funding I will take the credit.
If DNAG goes under I will blame no one but myself.
But the scam spam has gotten old.
Theo,Sam,BBBabe,
Thanks for the input.
The latest 8K from DNAG states
As previously reported, on January 18, 2008, the Registrant entered into a nonbinding letter of intent with Nanobac Pharmaceuticals, Incorporated, and the letter of intent was amended on February 1, 2008. The Registrant has now terminated that letter of intent, and the transaction contemplated thereby will not be consummated.
This looks like the Registrant (DNAG) terminated the LOI with nonobac. "The Registrant has now terminated that letter of intent"
I can understand why Nanobac would terminate the deal, but why would DNAG terminate it?
Any help?
Yahoo Finance shows
DNAPRINT GENOMICS INC Financials
EDGAR Online Financials(Sat 9:04am)
but I cannot access it and cannot find it o edger.
MAR 31 2008 08:30 | Doggie DNAPrint® 1.0.0 beta database online. Click here to search for your dog.
alterboy4 On or about March 31, sounds like down to the wire to me.
We shall see what we shall see.
Acquisition of Business . Buyer proposes to acquire the entire Business, including all assets and operations used in or related to the Business. We intend to complete the closing of the Acquisition (the “Closing”) on or about March 31, 2008 or such other time as we may agree upon.
I had thought that their was a new LOI stating ASAP but can't find it.
ann441j,
I don't remember the "others comming soon" on the DNAG site before. Is that new?
old articles, press releases etc. for anyone interested.
http://dnapinvestor.com/articles.html