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.
dcspka, that contradicts vester_guy who has said MANY times that the "takeover group" already owns more than 55% of RXPC and is just waiting for patent news to announce the takeover.
LC Sentinel WAS onko-sure, by the way. That's all it was -- just another name for DR-70. Gartner took it with him when he left Provista -- today, Provista says very firmly in their correspondence that they are NOT using DR-70 in any of their tests and have no plans to do so, ever. Please contact them and ask yourself.
Finally -- there is no LC Sentinel today -- Gartner is trying to change its name to "the Lung Cancer Test."
Furthermore, onko-sure does not currently have FDA clearance for ANY purpose. So how will "they" use this test for lung cancer? Notice that GCDx has never actually tried to sell the test yet?
Contact Provista and ask them if they are involved with Radient in any kind of business deal, merger, agreement, or takeover.
When they say "absolutely not," call them liars.
April 22nd is a non-event. It is just another stage in the Class Action.
After the 22nd, Radient will have 15 business days to put the $2.5M into escrow.
* If they put the money into escrow, there has to be ANOTHER court date for the final dismissal with prejudice.
* If they do NOT put the money into escrow, that opens a whole new can of worms - Rosen would have to sue. That could drag on for months or years.
Next week will not be interesting at all -- nothing is going to change next week, or the week after, or the week after... unless Radient files for bankruptcy.
vester_guy: NO reverse merger
* William Gartner does not work for Provista any more.
* Even if he did, that 2010 LOI was extended to 12/31/2010 but expired on that date.
* Provista does not own GCDx.
* You say "I sense now they will wrap this gift up after the court hearing on Tuesday. That is the synchronicity event we have been waiting for." Previously you said, several times, that the merger was waiting on Radient's patent. Now the class action settlement is the catalyst? Why did that change?
Thanks in advance!
Someone should tell Provista shareholders that their thriving company is about to be a subsidiary of Radient Pharmaceuticals as described in the 2010 LOI.
Then show them the last 10-K that Radient filed, for 2011.
Then stand back. WAY back.
That's the new patent?
Well that is bad news, because that is the RCE application we've been talking about. RCE applications are in a 3-to-4-year backlog. That means the USPTO won't even open that case until 2016 or 2017.
So if THAT is the patent the "creeping takeover groups" are waiting for, they still have a LONG wait.
Also, GCDx is NOT owned by Provista Diagnostics. I suggest you contact Provista Diagnostics and ask them if they own GCDx to verify this. They cannot lie about something material like that.
And while you have Provista on the phone, ask them if they have plans to merge with, take over, or work with Radient or DR-70 or onko-sure in any way, shape, or form. I am quite confident they will say "absolutely not." That's what they told me two years ago when I contacted them.
And why does "underdawg" say that the RCE patent application is "the only update since October?" Does he mean October 2012? Because nothing has changed with that patent application since February 2013 when it was submitted.
So nothing has changed with this stock since October 2012? Hasn't "underdawg" heard about the UNI agreement?
Where is this "solid information on Radient?"
All I'm seeing is patents and drugs and devices owned by Provista in 2005 through 2010. Those are not assets of Radient.
Radient has no assets. Radient is not being taken over, merged with, or acquired.
Anyone who disagrees needs merely to show what assets Radient has.
Gartner IS a genius.
And that is why is not getting involved in ANY way with RXPC.
RXPC has no assets. Gartner apparently has patents, friends, shells, and everything else he could ask for... including a license to manufacture and sell DR-70 that he paid for in 2012, according to you.
So Gartner is not taking over, merging with, acquiring, or working with RXPC in ANY way, shape, or form.
I did not request any PR's about Grimes or anyone else who used to work for Gartner or Provista. I requested the following:
1. The patent number of any patent that will protect DR-70 after Radient's last patent expires in six weeks.
2. The patent application publication number of any patent application for DR-70 other than Radient's RCE patent application.
3. Evidence that Gartner was involved in ANY way with the Dignyte merger. You claim to have meticulously laid this out. Where?
Without these, the evidence shows, quite CLEARLY I might add, that Radient has no assets.
No entity would take over, merge with, or acquire a company like Radient that has no assets and $$$ millions in debt. I challenge anyone to find a WORSE candidate for a takeover, on the pinksheets or anywhere else.
You cannot show any evidence that Gartner was involved in the Dignyte merger.
You cannot show any patents for DR-70 other that Radient's current patent that expires in six weeks and their RCE patent application that hasn't been touched by the USPTO.
End of story.
Wolf, since DD is your forte -- if you want to know the whole story behind the Dignyte and Summit Capital owners..... do some DD on the town of Red Deer in Alberta and Summit Capital and the names in question.
Also do some DD on the Tracker Corporation of America (located in Toronto) circa 1996.
You will then understand that Julie Johnson is not involved with the Dignyte merger in any way.
And then you will realize that Gartner is not involved either.
The evidence has been meticulously laid out? Please repeat the post number where this happened. I have not seen any evidence, meticulous or otherwise.
Then read the SEC filing for which I just posted a link. It shows a relationship between Christiansen and Dignyte, through Summit Capital. It was Christiansen who found Dignyte for MacLellan. Gartner had NOTHING to do with Dignyte.
Want to know how MacLellan REALLY found Dignyte?
Of course you already know this, wolfie, since DD is your "forte." But I'll share it, just the same. It wasn't Gartner -- it was Christiansen, because of his relationship with Summit Capital.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1477168/000149315214001139/form10k.htm
Search this 10-K for a few of your favorite names, like Summit and Christiansen.
I repeat: Gartner had NOTHING to do with the Dignyte/eWellness merger. Furthermore, this shows that MacLellan and Christiansen are working on projects not related in ANY WAY to RXPC.
wolf, you say:
"You might find the PATENT you are STILL looking for..I will give you another hint..A place to look for the Patent. "
You keep talking about patents that Radient does not own. The discussion here is:
* When Radient's patent for DR-70 expires in six weeks, will DR-70 be protected by any other patents?
* When Radient's patent for DR-70 expires in six weeks, what assets will Radient have that make it a buyout/merger/takeover candidate?
So if you know of a patent for DR-70 other than Radient's patent that expires in six weeks, tell us the patent number.
Or, if you know of a patent application for DR-70 other than Radient's RCE application, tell us the publication number.
Any other patents are off-topic. Gartner may own patents, and Amarantus and Provista may own patents, and I may own a couple of patents, but none of them are assets owned by Radient, and none of them lend any credence to a Radient takeover rumor.
Accumulated facts, present day, yes.
William Gartner is trying to start up a business that sells DR-70 on the internet as a Lung Cancer Test. In 2012, he created a company called Global Cancer Diagnostics (GCDx) and built a website that you can still find today. Then he signed an agreement in 2012 with Radient to license DR-70, but his funding fell through, and that agreement was cancelled.
Then he pitched this business plan at AZ Bio the following spring.
Then he pitched this business plan on Fundable, but stopped after raising only $200.
Send an email to GCDx -- you won't get an answer. Try to leave them a voice mail -- their mail box is full.
Those are the facts. That's as "present day" as it gets for GCDx.
Anything else is conjecture. Personally, I think Gartner's business plan looks better to potential investors if Radient just disappears. In six weeks, Radient's last patent for DR-70 expires, and GCDx has no use for Radient. GCDx, or anyone else, can manufacture and sell the test without permission or licensing from Radient.
In six weeks, Radient will have NO ASSETS other than a pinksheet listing and a patent for CIT, a product that Radient said in their last 10-K is worthless. Those are the accumulated facts. That is "present day" for Radient.
No entity is going to take over a company that has no assets. The takeover rumor is just silly.
Randall Grimes is not associated with RXPC in any way.
William Gartner may have wanted to merge Provista with Radient in 2010 when he was CEO of Provista, but the following has happened since then:
* Any and all agreements and LOI's between Provista and Radient expired.
* Gartner no longer works for Provista.
* Radient ceased operations.
I see no evidence that Gartner was involved in Dignyte in any way.
But if he was -- so what? That has nothing to do with Radient or RXPC.
In fact, your entire post here is about everything under the sun EXCEPT RXPC. I don't understand the purpose of this.
absolutely not.
I am saying, McRobbie blood mother, Johnson step father, look it up on White Pages and you will understand.
There is no link between GCDx and Radient other than GCDx wants to sell Radient's product on the internet but has so far been unable to get funding for the project.
There is no link between GCDx and Dignyte other than they are in the same state, and there is a 6-degrees-of-separation link that bonds the Chairman of the Board at Dignyte with the CEO of GCDx because of past "proposed dealings." MacLellan and Gartner never actually closed a deal with each other. They had LOI's and proposals and intentions and contemplations but they never closed a deal between them.
Gartner had nothing to do with the Dignyte merger, the Dignyte ex-CEO's mother is named Cheryl not Julie and her last name is not Johnson (his FATHER is named Johnson, of Summit Capital), and Radient has a NEGATIVE value while Dignyte has a POSITIVE value.
Good luck with your 2010 Provista/Radient merger! You might want to contact Provista and remind them that they are supposed to be merging with Radient. I don't think they know.
Gartner may be a biotech genius and a business wizard.
But you say he already has the license to manufacture and sell DR-70, and in six weeks when the patent expires he won't even need THAT.
He already has Radient's only asset, as short-lived as that asset may be. So there is NO REASON for Gartner or Provista or anyone else to acquire RXPC stock or take over Radient as a company. No reason at all. If they want a shell to get listed on an exchange, they merely need to find a Dignyte somewhere that has no debt and hasn't issued all of its authorized shares.
The rear view mirror shows facts and truth. I base my investment decisions on facts and truth.
I say, a rearview mirror is a better place to do research than tea leaves and crystal balls and Twitter.
Gartner is not looking to own, take over, or acquire RXPC. Nobody is, because RXPC has no assets. Unless you consider the bottom-tier pinksheet listing and 5 billion issued shares "assets." I do not.
That LOI for the Radient/Provista merger in 2010 described Provista becoming a subsidiary of Radient.
in 2010, it looked like Radient had $20 million shareholder equity, with new financing just completed. Provista was smaller and had fewer assets.
Fast forward to today. Radient has a huge shareholder deficit because that $20 million equity was Jade and the SEC forced Radient to admit in 2011 that Jade was worth nothing. Radient defaulted not only on the 2010 loans but the 2011 loans as well. Radient today has no facility or even an office and has no assets.
Provista, meanwhile, did some financing of their own, built a huge new facility, and today is successfully operating.
For that 2010 LOI to be "enforceable" or "in force" or whatever, that means Provista is still going to become a subsidiary of Radient.
Not likely, in my opinion.
How do you "enforce" an "intent?"
If you meant you think the LOI is still "IN FORCE," sorry, that LOI had an expiration date. It was extended to 12/31/2010 and never extended further.
"On September 27, 2010 RPC signed an extension of its original agreement dated July 13, 2010 to merge with Provista Diagnostics Inc., making the agreement between Provista Diagnostics and Radient Pharmaceuticals effective through December 31, 2010."
Besides, a LOI is not a legally binding contract that is ever "in force." It is an agreement that the parties intend to do something. At any time, either party can back out without paying a fine or getting sued.
Seriously though, the backdoor creeping merger rumor has, at its foundation, the 2010 LOI describing a merger between Radient and Provista? The Provista that had William Gartner as CEO? You don't think that Gartner leaving Provista might throw a wrench in this merger?
Provista answers emails and their telephone.
Contact them and ask them if they have any plans to work with Radient or use DR-70 or do anything at ALL with Radient, its officers, its products, or its future.
I did. The answer I got would just be hearsay, so instead of repeating it here, I urge anyone and everyone to contact Provista YOURSELF to get the truth right from the source.
The Provista/Radient merger you are quoting was cancelled several years ago. Today, Provista is not involved, in ANY way, with Radient.
But by all means, prove your case. Please tell us the patent number for even ONE Provista patent that involves Radient, DR-70, onko-sure, MacLellan, or CIT in ANY way.
The USPTO system is easy to search. I've done a lot of patent searches. I only see one existing patent for DR-70, and it expires in six weeks. I only see ONE patent pending for DR-70, and it was rejected, then resubmitted in Feb 2013 as an RCE, and currently sits in the RCE backlog queue. Research that I have posted several times shows that an RCE submitted in 2013 will not be reviewed for at least three years after submission. That's Feb 2016.
The RXPC situation is NOT complex, IMO.
The takeover rumor is complex, yes, but it has to be to get around its logical fallacies and contradictions.
The RXPC situation is quite simple: the company got a device cleared by the FDA in 2006 but revenues never exceeded 5% of operating costs. As a result, The company defaulted on every loan they took out, the were delisted in 2011 when the SEC forced them to admit they had no shareholder equity, and today they don't have a facility or employees. Today, there are only two officers left, and one of them, the CEO, has been working on other ventures for the past two years.
The company currently has two "assets" -- a patent for DR-70 that expires in six weeks and a patent for CIT, an untested therapy that the company said in their last 10-K is worthless.
There is only one patent pending application for DR-70, and that application was rejected, then resubmitted as an RCE, and now sits in the RCE backlog at the USPTO where it probably won't even be opened again until 2016.
So it's very simple. This company is not a takeover candidate because there are no assets to take over. This company sits idle, no PR's, no SEC filings, no activity. How could it be simpler?
A billion shares DID trade on the MJ rumor.
Look at the posts about the MJ rumor on this RXPC message board spread over three days -- the three days that experienced the high volume totalling a billion shares.
Almost every post on this message board was about a rumor being spread on Twitter that this company was moving into the MJ arena.
I asked "But will Radient file an 8-K for the class action?"
"If they do -- what does that say about the UNI and GCDx licensing agreements? I suggest that it means Radient is releasing 8-K's when they feel they should, and not holding any back.... which means the GCDx agreement was never renewed... but does that also mean the UNI agreement was cancelled, since there was no 8-K for the $80,000?
And if they don't -- that lends credence to the assertion that Radient is selectively filing 8-K's and is being secretive. Interesting. "
Nobody is saying there should be an 8-K for a creeping takeover. But I thought this rumor was about a creeping backdoor merger? Certainly, someone would file an 8-K for a merger.
vester_guy, you said here, on March 30:
"The lenders and Creeping takeover groups control 85 to 90 percent of the 5 Billion authorized shares."
Do you still believe this? If not, what changed in the past three weeks?
And if you do believe this, how do you explain the billion shares that traded on the MJ rumor? That's 20% of the 5 billion and it traded under 0.0005 on nothing more than a Twitter rumor. That tells me there were a lot of RXPC shareholders who wanted to sell into that MJ rumor.... I don't see why the lenders or your takeover groups would sell so cheap.
And it looks like you are saying today that 50% is held by the takeover groups -- that means 35% to 40% is held by lenders? Yet they are not filing current Schedule 13's? You know they can't just file one in 2011 or 2012 and be done -- they have to file Schedule 13's quarterly if they want to stay current..... So it seems that you are saying the Lenders own 35% to 40% but not one of them owns 5%, so there are more than 7-8 lenders holding RXPC shares?
Fair enough. And I predict that MacLellan does not release a PR of any kind for the Rosen lawsuit, ever. In fact, I predict that MacLellan never releases a PR for Radient ever again.
But will Radient file an 8-K for the class action?
If they do -- what does that say about the UNI and GCDx licensing agreements? I suggest that it means Radient is releasing 8-K's when they feel they should, and not holding any back.... which means the GCDx agreement was never renewed... but does that also mean the UNI agreement was cancelled, since there was no 8-K for the $80,000?
And if they don't -- that lends credence to the assertion that Radient is selectively filing 8-K's and is being secretive. Interesting.
And the takeover rumor is also exactly that - a rumor? I fail to see the difference between the two rumors.
Unfortunately, when I look between, around, and directly AT the Radient 8-K's, all I see is silence. If the UNI agreement was cancelled like the GCDx agreement, that means Radient hasn't actually done ANYTHING positive since they closed the loans in 2011.
Personally, I have a 401k on one hand, and in the retail tradign account, I buy nothing but pennystock biotechs. This strategy has worked well for me. I guess I'm not balanced at all. It's just what's been profitable for me. And a non-reporting stop-sign pinksheet like RXPC doesn't fit my strategy. I realize that some have made money on RXPC, especially on the MJ rumor, but this risk is too high for my tolerance.
I still find this stock to be one of the best stories on Wall Street, even with the recent lack of news. If they were making a movie about it, your takeover would happen in Act 3 !!!
All humor aside, I do understand what you are saying, dcspka.
I personally like more concrete evidence in a biotech, but everyone's risk tolerance is different. I like rumors, but I like rumors created by a good solid Phase II clinical or FDA clearance of a 510(k).
Of course, many drugs fail in Phase III and many devices fail in the real world after getting FDA clearance. But who knows, maybe Radient will find a way to get more funding, hire Chang, and develop a cancer vaccine.
Unfortunately, I think that will require a reorganization that cancels all current shares and restructures the debt. But, that is just my opinion.
Best of luck to all shareholders!
Then you think the RXPC MJ rumor is true?
Because I see a lack of concrete evidence of Radient's venture into the MJ arena, and I see a lack of concrete evidence of Radient being merged with, acquired, or taken over, and I see the lack of Schedule 13's describing how some entity owns 5% of Radient or more. It all looks similar to me. Ockham's Razor seems to apply perfectly.
Correct me if I am wrong, but the professionals you describe -- the ones who saw the spaces between the notes and know what to look for and how to interpret that -- bought RPC in 2011 at $30 per share. Those shares are now called RXPC and they are worth under 0.0005 per share. I capiche that. What I do not capiche is how that is a profitable investment strategy. And isn't that the definition of "professional?"
dcspka, you said:
"Wow, what a simplistic view to apply to the Stock Market. Evidently Ockham doesn't know much about investing."
You seem to understand Ockham's Razor then, at least on the surface. But the true value of scholastic philosophy lies beneath the surface. In the case of a stock like RXPC, I think Ockham's Razor is ANYTHING but simplistic, and quite appropriate.
I doubt William of Ockham invested much, since he lived in the 13th Century. But his wisdom is timeless, at least in my opinion. He was known as the Doctor Invincibilis or "Unconquerable Teacher."
dcspka, you said:
"The Uni agreement has already been voided due to non-payment of the $100,000 up front portion of a $500,000 licensing fee. "
Vester Guy says Radient is not filing with the SEC simply because they do not have to. The lack of SEC filings has us all guessing. It's a fun game, wouldn't you agree? I am confident that everyone realizes we are all stating conjecture.
So I think what you meant to say is this:
"I believe the Uni agreement has already been voided due to non-payment of the $100,000 up front portion of a $500,000 licensing fee. "
As for evidence that UNI is manufacturing DR-70 and not merely selling old stock per their 2011 licensing agreement with Radient: I think the shelf life of DR-70 is such that they could not be currently selling old test kits they bought in 2011. I think this is why SRL sold their remaining kits at half price and then stopped selling DR-70 altogether.
Radient has not been manufacturing DR-70 test kits for quite some time, to my knowledge. True, they might be secretly making test kits in a non-FDA-approved facility somewhere. I doubt that is the case, especially if they are being bought out/acquired by a takeover group with Deep Pockets. It seems far-fetched to say that Radient is secretly manufacturing test kits and selling them to UNI who is then selling them on other Asian websites, all under the 2011 licensing agreement.
But again -- all conjecture. In the case of this stock, I subscribe to the theory called "Ockham's Razor," which means the simplest explanation is probably true. That means there is no subterfuge with 4.9% sub-takeover-groups, no secret licensing agreements, no hiding anything from the SEC.
In other words: if you see nothing happening, then most likely, nothing is happening.
"The Agreement contains non-compete and confidentiality terms regarding the Licensed Products, the latter of which expires 5 years after the Agreement terminates. "
Yes, but if the agreement is never activated, neither apply; and if the agreement IS activated but later terminated, only the confidentiality clause ("the latter") applies. GCDx and UNI can both manufacture and sell DR-70 (onko-sure) immediately upon terminating any agreement they have.
The agreements are only valuable as long as Radient holds the patent. The fact remains that Radient's last patent for DR-70 expires on June 3rd 2014. There is no getting around that. And Radient's only patent pending application is an RCE which means it will probably be several years before it is even acted upon by the USPTO.
There is the chance, albeit slim, that Radient could get a patent for DR-70 in, say, 2016 or 2017. Interesting to see what happens then if UNI and/or GCDx are having success selling DR-70.
It may be true that Radient has not filed with the SEC simply because they do not have to file to maintain listing on the pinksheets. They may never file with the SEC again, simply because they do not have to.
I don't consider that to be good news for RXPC shareholders. I don't think that is the sign of a good investment. I think that even a shell should file with the SEC. Dignyte files with the SEC, for example, as do many other shells that ceased operations.
Correct me if I am wrong, but it sounds like the proponents of the takeover rumor are saying the following:
* this company filed an 8-K to announce the cancellation of the GCDx agreement, but then revived that agreement and received full payment, but didn't release another 8-K to reveal this because they are hiding this news to allow someone to acquire the stock at a lower price;
* A takeover entity is using smaller groups to each acquire 4.9% or less of the outstanding shares to avoid filing Schedule 13-D's, hiding their intent to take over this company.
Everyone's risk tolerance is different. But if even ONE of those is actually true, I consider this stock to be an unusually high risk. Astronomical, even. Just my humble opinion.
And I really am not understanding the assertion that some entity, other than Radient perhaps, filed secret patent applications for DR-70 that are SO secret nobody can find them in the USPTO database. I've done a lot of patent research in my time, and that defeats the purpose of patent searches. The USPTO makes every attempt to be transparent.
The terms of the Rosen Lawsuit ARE finalized and agreed upon. Radient settles for $2.5 million, if they pay then Rosen and the plaintiffs let it drop. April 22nd is just the day that Radient is supposed to put the money into escrow. The court won't dismiss with prejudice until after that money goes into escrow.
Radient does not have the money, but the question is, will insurance cover the $2.5 million settlement? Looks likely, but I will believe it when I see it.
BK is not imminent. BK may NEVER happen. If the $2.5M settlement is paid by insurance, this company will likely never go BK and never do anything else, for that matter. No news, no developments, nothing, ever.
The "doom and gloom scenario" in 2011 was: "delisting, Jade equity revealed to be zero, company ceases operations, 5 billion shares get issued, stock price falls sub-penny." All that came true.
The "doom and gloom scenario" today is: crickets chirping, tumbleweeds rolling, and this stock staggers on like a zombie forever. Seems like that has already come true too.
The takeover rumor that was started in March 2011 is still staggering around like a zombie, too. I don't see that ever ceasing either. But, who knows, maybe the current proponents of the takeover rumor will give up, some day.
that is not what I said at all.
I said Radient is dead and MacLellan is no longer doing ANYTHING with RXPC. Nobody is leaving RXPC, nobody is joining RXPC, there is no merger or takeover, this company does not and will not operate.
The UNI Agreement was cancelled because there is no SEC filing saying the fee was paid, but the GCDx agreement was paid because there is no SEC filing saying it wasn't? Fine, whatever. None of that matters when the last patent expires on June 3rd 2014. All active agreements terminate on that date, and any kind of exclusivity or confidentiality clauses terminate with the agreement(s). In six weeks, anyone can manufacture, market, and sell the test without paying RXPC another penny. That will officially be the end of RXPC. They have no assets left when their last DR-70 patent expires.
As for the patent on CIT -- that won't expire for a while, but RXPC wrote off CIT as worthless. It is not an asset, according to the company. They would know, I think.
Pity that the MJ rumor was debunked -- that was the only catalyst here. Personally, I found the MJ rumor to be every bit as absurd as the merger rumor, but the pennystock traders showed some interest in the MJ rumor -- they are showing zero interest in the merger rumor, wouldn't you agree?
dcspka you said:
"Lakeshore: Why would William Gartner continue pursuing RXPC if he did not pay the full $280,000 as per terms of the agreement? "
Answer: William Gartner is not pursuing RXPC. He is pursuing FUNDING. In his AZBio sales pitch and on Fundable, he pursued FUNDING. When/If he gets funding, he will then pursue a license for DR-70, or he will wait until after June 3rd, after which he won't need that license. In NO scenario would he care whether RXPC merges with or is taken over by another entity. A Radient merger or takeover doesn't help Gartner or GCDx in any way.
If what you and wolfie say is true -- Gartner already has the license for DR-70 and Gartner filed his own patent application for his LC test -- the best thing for Gartner and GCDx would be for RXPC to go bankrupt and disappear. Gartner already got the one thing he wanted from RXPC, according to you.
Incidentally, it looks like Dignyte/eWellness is a go:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1550020/000149315214001111/form8k.htm
Looks to me like MacLellan has abandoned Radient and is moving on to other business ventures. First KwicKans, then his real estate business in Florida, now eWellness. Meanwhile, Radient sits idle.