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.
Not sure if anyone here is a Seinfeld fan but Mark should do what George Costanza did in that one episode where he did the opposite of what he would normally do and was successful.
I understand your point but a couple things. I'm not saying this all makes sense but I can't think of any other reason why we are at this point.
1. Neilsen purchased his shares on the open market and there is no disputing his ownership and his right to sell when he chooses.
2. Iconic was supposedly paid in full by virtue of AVDX shares (which was used as collateral) and Iconic even acknowledged that and withdrew their original suit.
3. The ownership of the 72mm shares is therefore in question - believe there was language in the court docs that mentioned that if granted access to these shares, would result in an "undeserved windfall" for Iconic or something to that affect.
4. I think it can be more than just Iconic. I think the Taub case factors in as well. One potentially lucrative part of their business (food safety testing with the USDA) is in question in terms of ownership.
Administratively they are a mess - no question. I just don't think that it's a coincidence that filings stopped when the lawsuits started. I may very well be wrong - it's just my opinion.
My only issue with that theory (and I am one who believes the lack of financials is in fact related to the ongoing litigation) is that the court ordered that those 72mm shares can't be sold. Maybe not being current is extra insurance that they can't sell - who knows.
Don’t get too caught up in the 3rd quarter reporting. The only person I have seen that floated that idea as a possibility or some meaningful deadline is James. Realistically that’s not going to happen. Maybe a miracle happens and they file bit but i wouldn’t count on it.
You got that right. They make the old crew seem amateurish in comparison.
Someone should do a drive by and see if there are any new cars/temporary tags in the parking lot. Could be an indicator if business is in fact good.
Regarding the microarray run, they basically just set up the machine and it does it’s thing. Not much manual/human work at all from what I understand. Very high margins (>90% from what I’ve been told) so that should make the cost of production next to nothing.
Agreed Mike but this isn’t really anything new is it? Just seems that the latest missed deadline was really the last final straw for some. Fool me once.......fool me 10x.....
Or is it possible that some of the much talked about billings are actually getting paid - yes - I know we don't know at what percent :)
Where did you see the $400.00 figure? The Optimum Allergy Solution website states the below. Factor in co-pays for weekly office visits for shots, paying out of pocket might be the better choice depending on your co-pay.
I see your point - there are probably some people that do this specifically for the toothpaste delivery. I suppose that could impact the number of tests being conducted. I suspect that could be a small number though. If I got allergy tested and they said I need to be treated for that allergy either through a shot (covered), drops (covered), or toothpaste (not covered) I would honestly probably just choose the drops and be done with it. The value to me is in the testing, not the treatment.
None of us know too much about the clinics. From what I have seen and heard, the fingerstick allergy testing is being offered primarily through family medicine/general practitioner offices. Not sure how many Allergy Care Center type clinics have popped up with the express purpose of offering this test and selling Allerdent.
Did you not know that going into it? It's pretty clear on the PAS and Optimum websites that insurance may not cover the Allerdent/OMIT immunotherapy.
Arrayit provides the tests and lab services - if the tests come back positive for certain allergies, the patient's doctor can prescribe whatever type of immunotherapy that would be most suitable - shots, SLIT (drops under the tongue, or OMIT (Allerdent) and it gets delivered through the mucous membranes in your mouth. I don't think there is anything that mandates the use of Allerdent.
So if I understand your experience correctly, you took the test (twice or was one your wife?), got the results, agreed with the results, attempted to get your insurance to cover Allerdent and they refused due to their view of OMIT as being experimental, and then you got pissed off at Arrayit? Do I have that right?
The allergy extracts used in Allerdent are in fact FDA approved. It's the method of delivery (OMIT vs. SLIT) that's considered experimental. If I had young children with allergies, I would absolutely try this. Would you rather subject your kids to skin testing, weekly shots, and trial and error food allergy testing that some kids actually die from?
I'm less concerned about Allerdent because as far as I know, Arrayit has nothing to do with the immunotherapy - they are doing the testing
And just to ward off anyone questioning why they don't see PAS in that picture......
Thanks for posting this. I was doing some investigating on PAS the other day and it led me to the Allocate website. They are the company that manufactures the Allerdent toothpaste. Anyway, I was reading the press release from last year where they announced the partnership between PAS and Allovate - this passage in particular caught my attention.
https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2017/12/19/1266153/0/en/New-Test-and-Treatment-Allergy-Program-Enables-All-Physicians-To-Provide-Convenient-And-Effective-Allergy-Care.html
Agreed. Classic boy who cried wolf scenario at play.
My screen grabs couldn't be uploaded for some reason so I took pics of my screen grabs on my phone and tried to upload those. Got this response from iHub
- Oops! An error occurred.
Sorry about that. We've logged the error and it will be investigated.
I'll try again later. The standard response is appropriate. Could the Nasdaq part be left off? I suppose. What I meant by meaningless is that it's meaningless to answering a question that could divulge insider information. The answer should be the same regardless of their uplisting intentions.
I still ask questions because i don't always know what is privileged info so I'd rather ask and have Mark not answer. It also serves the purpose of letting him know what's on my mind without completely going off and venting. He is always very respectful and responsive with me and I am with him as well.
I will say this - I've been in somewhat regular communication with Mark over the years primarily via email, occasionally on the phone, and one time in person years ago when I was in SF for work.
In all of these conversations, he has never once revealed to me anything that could be classified as potentially insider info. I asked about financials, auditors, timing, unaudited financials, lawsuits, etc. and he just referred to this generic statement. It's the right thing to do. All he is saying is that any material information related to financials or legal proceedings will be announced to everyone through a press release or SEC filing. I see nothing wrong with his response. The NASDAQ part is meaningless - that shouldn't matter.
I don't have a problem sharing it - don't have PM so let me do a screen grab. I literally posted everything here so I'm not sure what is so questionable. Not much was learned.
Who actually thinks that they would report anything by the 3rd quarter? I truly don't think anyone (long or short) thinks that's a possibility so it will probably have little to no impact on the price in my opinion.
Expectations can't be lower at this point.
Surprised? No. Disappointed? Yes.
Question regarding their new website.
You'll get no dispute from me on that Jrsh. Need something. Anything really.
I don't want this to turn into another fake email conversation with you but I'd be curious to see this confession. I too asked several questions about financials and the auditor and each one was met with this response. Again - believe or don't - doesn't matter to me.
For what it's worth, I reached out to Mark with a bunch of questions. One which was related to the billings. I know there were some questions here whether these were repeats or cumulative amounts. Believe or don't believe - just passing along the info.
Ha ha - Sorry James - thought you said you were 86. My mother in law just turned 85 and she can barely operate any new technology!
Hell I'm 50 and I have a hard enough time myself.
And shouldn’t you have been in bed like 3 hours ago???
For an older gentleman I’m impressed on how well you have been using technology. Not be being a smart ass either:)
Ha ha. Yeah right. The truth is can’t be found on this board.
Same business....... as in gambling???
Had a typo in that post. My average is .0009. Left a zero out. :)
If you bought right before the April fools fiasco then you are correct - terrible trade. Not necessarily a terrible investment. It all depends on your timeframe.
Based on what you have posted here about yourself you are clearly a gambler. It sounds like you placed a bet hoping they would post financials as many of us did hoping for a big win. My average cost on the other hand is .009 so it’s all about perspectives.
Hysteria???? Not quite. Good news ??? No question that it is. If the shoe was on the other foot you know you would be crowing about it. It’s the precursor to the end of the long nightmare which is the Taub case. I’ve been here a long time and I can safely say that lawsuit was the start of the downward spiral for the company into the toxic financing that took us to a billion shares outstanding. All because these Mf’ers didn’t hold up their end of the contract.
Things have seemingly shifted in favor of the company. Just need those long overdue financials to be released. Regardless of what the company has said in the past I think the ongoing litigation has been a factor. Just my opinion
I believe he is referring to me. Please refer to my post from earlier in the day. I can repost it when I am in front of a computer tomorrow
Not to disparage anyone on this board but there is a major misunderstanding of what the business model is here. One thing we can agree on is not to take anyone’s word for things. Do your own due diligence and decide for yourself. I have and I am comfortable with what I own.
Thank you Mike - thought you had posted something about this in the past but couldn't find it quickly.
I agree with that but as Mike pointed out earlier today, that initial figure was over $250mm. If memory serves, that amount came from a Tweet that Arrayit put out claiming the value of the food testing. I almost took that as a big FU to the company - words have meaning and now we're going sue you for that amount. Over the course of time, it came down to a more "reasonable" $21mm. Not sure if there were any reductions in between but Mike can clarify as you said.
RH - it must be worth something if there was a lawsuit over it right?
So I didn't get a chance to call the clinic yesterday since I got busy with my real job :) I did speak to them this morning, however. This is what I found.
The clinic (Roxborough Primary Care) isn't offering the test any longer. They are offering the ImmunoCap (ThermoFisher) test and it gets sent to Lab Corps or Quest. When I asked why they stopped offering the other test (the Arrayit one) she said that they used to have an independent sales rep that would come in but he stopped because he was having some difficulties getting reimbursement. I said is that because it is a new test and she said yes. She said that there are 2 types of ImmunoCap tests - one for respiratory issues and the other for food. She rattled off all the different things they test for - i need to do some more research into ImmunoCap vs. Arrayit but it sounded like the Arrayit test covers many more allergens and is done with less blood. Need to check that though.
Couple points - I received the name of this clinic from the Patient Data Solutions person in early April. Based on the below Tweet from May, it's entirely possible (and likely based on my conversation) that there were some reimbursement issues. If a rep is going to have trouble getting paid then they will concentrate on selling other products. Arrayit seems to have figured that out and retained a company to work through those issues.
Arrayit adds our GlobeNewswire press release "Arrayit Corporation Retains Top Credentialing Company to Accelerate Allergy Testing Services Reimbursement from Major Healthcare Payors" to the home, corporate and investor web pages for shareholder convenience https://t.co/YARk9A7Eth pic.twitter.com/IzgY7qqLPT
— Arrayit Corporation (@arrayit) May 7, 2019
The wage dispute is small potatoes. The breach of contract claim by the plaintiff was denied. Do you agree with that? That’s the headline
That was old news man. When the court ruled there was no breach of contract Arrayit was simply trying to get $80k they had to pay back in 2016 partially due to this whole fiasco.
If that’s what you are focusing on then you’re missing the big news of the denial of breach of contract
We’ll find out in about 5 minutes!
Again I’m no expert but I was more worried about this case vs the Iconic one (which I also think will be dismissed)
If you believe the lack of financials had anything to do with the pending litigation like I do then it should be a good sign. Time will tell.
That's the Iconic case Jerry - i get all these legal issues mixed up myself sometimes. This one is a big case that's been lingering for many years. Taub/Zalcberg were suing Arrayit for breach of contract. There was a previous suit with Taub if I remember correctly that was settled by giving Taub the rights to the food safety test (the USDA test which can be massive). They were supposed to fund Arrayit's research or something to that affect and when they didn't it forced Arrayit to get into some of those toxic lending arrangements.
In my opinion the Taub case was potentially much more damaging to the company than Iconic so this is massive news.
The plaintiff's (Taub) case was denied in part and and granted in part. From my reading, Arrayit was seeking $80K in some sort of counter-claim for the money they had to pay to Kinnerk back in 2016 - I think it was Arrayit and Z Investors (Zalcberg, Taub, etc) that each had to pay half of the $160k judgement and Arrayit was trying to get this back. The judge ruled against that so I think that's where it was "granted in part"
I'm no legal expert so don't quote me on this. This is just how I am reading it.
I think the script was flipped. The mumbo jumbo we are now hearing incessantly is of the negative kind. Hopefully the news of the Taub case being dismissed will help bring a little more balance to board.