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.
Has some news hit, it's suddenly up over $.50.
Gary
Read my answer, it was based on the proposition we're currently making millions weekly. I don't know that's a fact, but I believe it may be.
Gary
If you're correct about a million or more a week, I agree. If that's the case they might actually be smart to buy back shares while they're this cheap. I don't know how much new manufacturing capability will cost however. If we had a contract to do every hospital in the U.K. in one year, I suspect they'd need hundreds of millions to deliver, but it would be worth it.
Of course it's also possible that growth can be slow and steady, and revenue can cover that growth. I frankly believe enough in what we're making to believe that in the next 5 to 10 years many of the worlds hospitals, and many other places should have our equipment available to them either through acquisition, or contracting services that provide it. Either way, a lot more units will be needed, and growth could be monumental.
A multi-billion dollar market cap for this company is not out of the question in not much over a year, perhaps even sooner.
Gary
Hopester,
I believe that well before June we'll know if PLX-PAD is effective for pneumonia, any type of pneumonia, not just coronavirus related. If it is, even $20 is low, that would reflect less than a half billion dollar market cap. I believe that if PLX-PAD becomes the preferred treatment for pneumonia patients, ideally before a ventilator is require, a billion dollar market cap could easily be achieved.
If it's not effective at all, we'll go back to looking for initial approval in CLI, and a billion dollar market cap will have to wait. If however it is effective, it will become the reason that we can recover faster as a nation and world as it will no longer be as deadly. Certainly precautions should still be taken to avoid it, but if it's not as threatening to life, people will go back to a more normal life until we have a vaccine.
Gary
I believe the company has been open about prior quarterly results being bad, it shouldn't have been a surprise. I don't believe it should be about the past, the Annual Report won't be much better, the first quarter should be a little better, but still not profitable. The current quarter, if we meet the projections we're getting, should begin to see a profit, and I believe profits will continue from here on out, with the exception that the company may need money to expand. Expansion is a good thing, so I won't object to whatever they need to do to accomplish it.
Gary
To me a discussion of where we are in the process of unblinding the trial is "Interesting" it's not something requiring a PR, but such a discussion, as well as a forecast for the move forward through approval would certainly be interesting. I don't know what will be said, but I do believe that much that could be interesting is available to the company, let's see what they have in mind.
Gary
Why does it matter to you about share count. Are you telling me that companies with over a billion shares can't be successful, you should take a look at Apple. Certainly dilution isn't something investors love, but they understand it may be necessary to fund the growth of the company.
Personally I don't like reverse splits because their history often fails to meet the intended goal. That said, on occasion they can work very well, so nothing is totally wrong with them. I believe that PSTI will potentially be a huge success on treatment of coronavirus based pneumonia, and they did a 1 for 10 R/S to stay on the Nasdaq. I'll be fine with it selling in triple digits, rather than double digits after its success.
PCTL on the other hand should shortly be able to move up from the pinks to the OTC. With success it will probably be able to move up to the AMEX, or even the Nasdaq in a matter of time, probably at least a year or more away. There is no reason to rush this action, a multibillion dollar market cap is not dependent on what exchange you trade on, and this company has the potential to have a multibillion dollar market cap.
Gary
Governor Cuomo just indicated that most patients who go on ventilators fail to survive, in the case of our patient, he's been on it over 20 days. It will be very big news if he recovers, and it will be especially interesting to see an assessment of what deterioration is seen in his various organs.
I certainly hope that future application of our drug reaches patients earlier in this vicious cycle. It would be interesting to see if hospitalizations couldn't be eliminated by injecting people at the initial indication they had pneumonia.
Pneumonia could become PSTI's greatest market if it's use became a part of the SOC for even a small fraction of those who get it. It's said in most year common flu kills many tens of thousands. Most these people die of pneumonia. If only those who's pneumonia is advanced enough to require hospitalization receive the drug, we're probably looking at hundreds of thousands annually on a worldwide basis.
Gary
Ask yourself where you'd rather be. In a hospital where rooms are sanitized with UV light infectious patients are moved through the hospital corridors by the nursing stations, which must be manned to monitor the patients. Can the lights be used in the corridors, no, can it be used in the hospital room with the patient present, no, in the lobbies, cafeteria, etc, not if it's occupied, and not where shadows prevent it's penetration.
Or would you rather be in a hospital that utilizes our system, one the can be used in rooms, corridors, lobbies, etc, etc. I believe there is little thought needed to determine what's best. Patients may not have a choice when they go to a hospital as to how it's sanitized, but I believe the hospital administrators will look at the difference and make the right decision in time. Nothing happens instantly, it takes money and planning, but over time I've got to believe that UV and other systems which can't reach everywhere, and which can't be used with people present will be replaced with systems that reach everywhere, and can be used with patients present.
Gary
In other companies in the past I'm aware of trials that were due to end after a specific number of events, typically something like 2/3rds the number in the trial. The problem with such an arrangement is that if the drug works well, the trial duration is exceptionally long. That could be the case here, but with the cross over design of the trial, where all could potentially see the benefits, some patients may die of old age rather than the disease before the trial ends.
I'm sure there are ways out of this Catch 22 situation, but if it's something like the last living patient must be in the trial 60 months, or frankly anything over about 36 it's overkill IMHO for a disease where survival at 36 months is as low as statistically it is with GBM.
When I first invested in the stock many investors believed that 36 months would trigger the unblinding, then it became 48 months, now you have to wonder if it's 60 months. It shouldn't be, I believe it was thought that it would end sooner, but perhaps that was based on a specific number passing on. Frankly I'd much prefer everyone alive now continue to live in health, the vaccine is clearly working, it's time to unblind the trial and tell everyone just how well it's working.
Gary
To me the saddest thing about quarterly and annual reports is all the history that must be repeated describing all sorts of things in the past, and how little can be said about what the company represents today. I know it's required by SEC laws and regulations, but frankly I wish they could simplify it.
If many of the documents included were simply put into a Federal Register, where anyone interested could quiry a computer system, but the quarterly and annual reports simply reported only the events of that quarter. Personally I'd like to see annual reports that were more like what they were decades ago. Certainly they could be electronic, but many back then were like magazines highlighting what the company was doing. Yes they also had the financial information, but they weren't loaded with a ton of information about the risks of investing in stock. Once again, all of that could be in the Federal computer system, anyone interested could find the information by simply going to the site and putting in the name, or stock symbol of the company.
I really doubt that most investors care very much about 90% of what's in this report, they want to know what the company did in the quarter, and what the company forecasts for coming quarters or more. We're all just relieved to finally have it out so restrictions on the stock can be removed.
Gary
Sukus,
The question I'd have is wouldn't Duffy be desirable to have in documenting the results, especially for the submission of a BLA. Of course if a partnership is made once top line data's in, the partner would no doubt take responsibility for the BLA and other issues involved with rolling out a new drug. The idea that Merck could be that partner remains a possibility, and will continue to be until something actually happens, even if NWBO goes through the approval process themselves.
By this time next year I believe all our questions will have been answered, it's possible we even have approval, but at minimum I believe we'll have our BLA in the hands of the 4 regulators. Hopefully by that time the world will no longer be concerned with coronavirus, life may not be all it was 3 months ago, but hopefully it will be far better than it is today.
Gary
Not that we'll ever learn, but it would be interesting to know how long it took to get the authority to give our drug to the patient. He's been on the ventilator a long time, it would be a shame if it was requested back on day one and it's taken over 3 weeks to obtain.
If I remember correctly, Thermo Fisher should have some of the drug available here in the U.S. If the following is correct, the total number of people on ventilators at the peak will be just over 14,000. Certainly many more doses would be needed to use it on everyone on a ventilator, as some come off as others go on, but it's possible that something as low as 25,000 doses might be all that was necessary to deal with those in the worst shape in the U.S. Worldwide the number would certainly be much higher, but still might be within PSTI's capability of achieving should an all out assault on the disease be made.
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america
I don't know what a fair price would be for practically ending the pandemic, but it's unlikely to happen, even if it could.
Gary
I believe it's really quite simple, what's a reasonable market cap for the company if it is effective against coronavirus. I believe the answer will be somewhere in the billions. If it fails there, but goes on to be approved in CLI and other indications, again I believe billions on success is where we should be. If everything is a complete failure, it doesn't take much to figure that, zero. I just don't see any indication that we're moving toward complete failure.
One of my biggest failure to invest came in the early 1990's when for about $15 I could have bought Amgen. A 100 share investment in 1990 would have been 4800 shares at the end of that decade after several splits and a price of roughly $100 then. I believe that in this decade PSTI has the potential to grow the way AMGN did back then. It could come fast, if results are positive with coronavirus, or it may be slow, with success in CLI and a lot of other things that will be determined to benefit beyond it. I believe it has the potential to be a game changer in all sorts of degenerative conditions.
Success in biotechs is rarely fast, but when they start to happen it's growth can be explosive. PSTI looked at pneumonia, it's in their patients, but they choose to go another way. Why? Because most people do recover from pneumonia, so proving a major benefit is difficult. Pneumonia with coronavirus is more deadly, and not that most will die, but many will, and are dying. If they go on ventilators their odds after a few days aren't very great.
I don't know if they can benefit the American who's been on a ventilator for over 20 days, but it's worth taking a chance and trying it. I would hope that they try it on people approaching the need for a ventilator, or who've only recently been put on one, as reports on people recovering after extensive time on ventilators indicate organs beyond the lungs are harmed.
Let's get this into more patients, then we'll know if we'll be paid sooner, or later.
Gary
For those who don't know, when you're getting stem cells for leukemia, before you get them chemo is used to kill off your entire ability to produce blood, essentially you're rebuilt with the new stem cells.
In the case of coronavirus patients, they're still producing blood. When I believed that PLX-R18 could be of benefit, I was thinking that it was intended to boost production of all the blood cells, red, white, and plasma, and my thought was that could help cure the pneumonia.
I'm no expert, I welcome the thoughts of those who are.
Gary
Interesting, the drug was injected into muscle in 15 places in the New Jersey patients body. Based on what others have said about time on a ventilator, this patient must be very near death with having been on a ventilator since March 20th.
If they had used PLX-R18, do the experts here think you'd still inject the muscles in the same way, or would the intent be to get it into the marrow to accelerate blood production. That could be achieved by putting it into the bloodstream, as that's how my stem cells were applied. In my case it was about day 4 that measurable blood was determined to be made, each day thereafter the numbers grew.
I wonder if all patients would receive the drug in so many places, or if this patient was deemed to be so severe that more injections were needed than in someone who wasn't as ill.
This was done by a hospital that was already participating in the CLI Trial, so they had drug on site. I hope some provision is in place to get the drug to families/doctors who request it that aren't associated with an existing trial.
Gary
Remember, the company has under 20 million shares outstanding. I frankly doubt if more than 25% of the people holding shares are selling, so a lot of day trading is going on by those who work that way. As an investor who buys and holds, I'd never trade in that manner, but many do.
Companies rarely issue major PR's mid day, so I guess that's some protection against selling at what you believe a high is, to buy back in hopefully a little lower. I know the brokerage houses will give you a full record for tax purposes, but I just wouldn't want to deal with it.
Gary
Thanks,
I'm supposed to see my Dr. for a routine exam in the next few weeks, if it's not delayed. If a blood based test is available by that time, I'll ask for it, I'm certainly also happy to let them do a nose swab. What's sad is that in spite the Federal Govt. stating otherwise, testing simply won't be done on people not exhibiting severe problems unless they've clearly been exposed.
To date, I don't know of anyone I know who's been verified as having the disease, but my daughter had a friend who was in her 40's pass away from it. This is a cruel disease, and even very healthy people are dying if they get a severe case.
Gary
It's very difficult to anticipate when, or how frequently the company will announce news about how the compassionate use is going. When a formal trial, or trials begin, silence about what's happening could be the case for the duration, which hopefully will be short term. I cannot imagine any difficulty enrolling hundreds, to thousands, in a matter of days.
Personally, I believe that all in a trial should get the drug, the control can easily be all the others in similar circumstances, but I doubt if the FDA and other regulators will treat it that way. I do believe there is a possibility that even a week or two into such a trial, if clinician see an obvious advantage to the use of the drug, the trial may be ended early with the agreement of the regulators assuring approval essentially immediately.
I would hope the company in the near future will say just how many have now been given the drug under compassionate use provisions. I believe that all these people can be openly discussed, it's considered anecdotal information about how the drug is working as they're not in a clinical trial. I suspect the number will increase rapidly, unless the company calls a halt to such treatment.
Gary
I think anyone with a choice should remain home, even if you feel fine. I note this morning that George Stephanopoulos was tested and found to have the disease. He indicated he feels fine, but his wife had it, and I believe is largely recovered, but that's apparently why he was tested, and it was positive. We'll see if he develops symptoms, or not, but it's essentially proof that any of us may have a very mild case, yet spread it to someone who may be severely affected.
Personally my throat has been slightly sore for a couple days, not bad, no fever, no more than normal congestion, but in today's world, you have to think about what's happening. We have not been out of the house in weeks, but my daughter, who's fine, has shopped for us, or various things have been delivered to the house. In short we've been very cautious, but I don't believe there is any way of being certain. I suspect that when they do finally have a solid blood based test to determine who's had it, they'll find that many who had no idea will be tested positive.
As I've indicated here, I believe that PSTI may have a drug that will counter the pneumonia, it's just starting testing and so far, so good. If I'm right, this could greatly lower the threat. I'm guessing it will be a month or more before there will be certainty about it.
Gary
ASCO 2020 is not cancelled, it's become a virtual conference. Here's a link to how they're planning to do it:
https://meetings.asco.org/am/asco-statement-novel-coronavirus-covid-19
No one's been told, to my knowledge, that an Abstract was submitted. I would think that could be announced at the Annual Meeting without a P.R. being released prior to it, and if ASCO has not yet accepted Abstract for presentations yet, even that may not be announced. Companies normally don't announce anything about ASCO until they have acknowledgement from ASCO that their Abstract was accepted, and is to be presented. I've yet to see a biotech announce a presentation at ASCO.
SNO is certainly where the complete data could be provided, I believe it's to early to know whether it will be a virtual conference, or the real thing, but it will probably be held in some way.
Gary
The problem I believe is that patients currently being put on PLX-PAD are already in serious condition, on ventilators. Some of the damage may already been done, while our drug may help restore some things, it's hard to say if all damage can be repaired. I certainly agree that we're probably saving lives of people on ventilators, but if we can get it to people who's pneumonia has just shown in X-rays, we can benefit them to the point they may never require hospitalization.
This will be an evolving process, first we dose those closest to dying, then those where ventilators are thought to be needed within a day or so, then to those with pneumonia serious enough to cause hospitalization, and finally to people who've just been found to have pneumonia, but who're still capable of self care at home. It could take some time to evolve through all these stages, but if we manage to do it, our drug could become SOC treatment for all determined to have pneumonia.
I cannot say what a fair price will be for treatment. No doubt it will be more than current therapies, but a certain percentage on current therapies even before coronavirus wound up in the hospital, with some eventually dying. The up front cost may be higher, but far fewer should require hospitalization, and far fewer should die, so the net cost may be substantially lower in spite of the higher initial cost.
If as another investor suggested, two injections are all that will be required, it's a small fraction of what's used in the treatment of CLI, so the cost should be a fraction of that treatment. Perhaps it may be found that in earlier pneumonia cases a single injection may be all that's required. We're really a long way from knowing how the drug may best be used, and we'll probably want to look at whether PLX-R18 may be as good or better under certain circumstances.
Let's hope we get good news from our first patient here in the U.S., but one person is hardly a trial, we really need to get it into many more.
Gary
In order to announce TLD at ASCO they would have had to have filed an Abstract that would at least get enough attention to justify a presentation. Now that ASCO's a virtual conference, if they're selected to make a presentation, I'd have to guess it would be a poster or slides that they can submit, perhaps a video.
If they intended to present at the Expert's Forum, I'm uncertain if that will even occur, I don't know where the audience would come from.
Gary
I'm very aware of the savings in time our system provides, the point I was making is a hospital could lease or purchase our machines, and train their staff to operate them, or they could contract. There is still substantial work the cleaning people should do as while our machine sanitizes everything, the least the cleaning people do is run a dry mop over the floor to clean it, remove the trash, etc.
If they determine to contract, it could be for all cleaning and sanitation services, or just sanitizing, with the remainder done by their staff.
Gary
When it comes to sanitizing a hospital we all need to recognize that the owners of the hospital have a choice of doing it with their own staff, or contracting for it. We've seen that at least one of our prime distributors and user is sanitizing several hospitals utilizing our equipment, rather than selling the equipment to the hospital, for hospital staff to do it.
It would be nice to know how many hospital choose to contract cleaning and sanitizing over having their own staff doing it.
Gary
One thing I cannot understand, if LP personally has many warrants, why would she possibly be attempting to have them expire worthless. Certainly she doesn't have them all, but enough to make a healthy profit, and bring a fair amount of money into the company by their conversion to stock.
I recognize that she may have a need to have more shares authorized in the future, but if the stock is selling for substantially more, I doubt if shareholders will turn her down. Frankly I thought such a measure would have been voted next Saturday, but it wasn't. It's also very possible that at some point in the future we'll have to vote on a partnership which includes this sort of issue to permit the partner to take a substantial equity interest.
Gary
The question of why the company raised money when it did may have been a case of being tempted by an Institution that want to buy in. When a broker comes to you with money, it's sometimes hard to say no, and when a broker has a customer wanting substantial shares, normally an Institution, they know they can sell out the offering. The company may want the interested investor to be a shareholder.
While it's JMHO, it's based on something I was told many years ago by a broker.
Gary
Meirluc,
You certainly may be right, but I would frankly be surprised if more than one or two of the current survivors are control patients, and unless a patient had a complete remission before the opportunity to cross over, I cannot see anyone doing it. My thought are all, or nearly all who didn't cross over may have passed on before the opportunity would have been available to them.
We have no idea what the terms of the SAP may be, or if they're even finalized. While I personally think it's crazy to wait for a specific number of deaths when people are living much longer than anticipated, the regulators are sometimes so set in their ways that it's not worth the battle you'd have to fight to make the change. It's also possible they're looking at the living patient in the trial the shortest period exceed XX number of months, over 48 sounds excessive to me, but anything is possible.
The last patient to enter the trial would be approaching 54 months I believe, I would hate to think they agreed to 60 months. In short, there is really no reason that a trial should be stretched out to this length, I believe the vaccines benefits would have been clear a couple years ago. Perhaps had more people died sooner the trial would have ended sooner, and would have been a success, especially in a disease that kills so many as quickly as GBM does.
Gary
In a recent post a service company was cited who used our equipment in a wide variety of hospitals and other medical facilities that went far beyond the ten hospitals we know have leased our equipment. This is telling me that in reality, our equipment is currently being used in far more than ten hospitals, but as stockholders, we really don't know how many.
If XXX Sanitation has a contract to sanitize 20 hospitals, the question that might be asked is, how many units do they need to do it. Certainly, if some of the hospitals are small, and located near one another a single unit might serve two or more such facilities. On the other hand, if some are massive hospitals, more than one unit may be needed just for that facility.
My point is that our business grows rapidly not just through sales or leases to hospitals and others, it grows by all the service companies that are using, and in some cases distributing it, and little accounting is being done for how many different facilities are being serviced by other companies. I have no idea if XXX Sanitation purchases, or leases our equipment, it really doesn't matter, what matters is as these businesses expand, so does the demand for our equipment.
It would be very interesting to see a list of all the contractors who're using our equipment, and all the facilities each had contracts with for doing their sanitizing. It shouldn't matter to us whether Hospital XXX has a lease or owns our equipment, or if they use a contractor who does that service for them, and they use our equipment. I frankly believe that contractors are often used to keep staffing levels down and pass the costs of maintaining a substantial staff on to others, rather than keeping everything in house. The key is the contractor maintaining the quality of their service.
Gary
I believe you're very right. I really don't believe we're going to be free to move around for awhile, so in spite of not getting delivery for about a month I place an order for washable cloth masks on Amazon that have replaceable filters, and some spare filters. These masks present far more protection than just cloth, but aren't quite N-95 masks. Just food for thought.
It's probably been nearly 50 years since the first time I went to Japan and encountered people wearing masks. Back then the locals told me these people largely had colds or the flu, and they were protecting others from getting it. It made a lot of sense, but we never adapted such practices. Today we have a virus that while you may feel fine, you still may be carrying and spreading it. Everyone wearing masks until this virus is no longer a threat to anyone, which may not be until we have a vaccine that's performing well.
Frankly, when coronavirus is long gone I hope we'll remember the benefits of using a mask, and wear them if we believe we have something which may be contagious. When I received stem cells, with my immune system practically nonexistent, I wore a mask everywhere, it's not that hard to do, but obviously you can't eat or drink while wearing one. The point is to get as much protection as you can reasonably, and I did.
Today, or rather in a few months from now if sports venues are reopened, I would recommend that masks be mandatory, and food and drink only available outside where they can be had while maintaining a distance from others. While this would certainly cut down on concessions, I believe it's a fair trade for resuming sports in a reasonably safe way.
Gary
At the Annual Meeting if almost nothing new is provided, I believe there is one bit of information that could be provided that would tell us a great deal, in fact I believe it could be sufficient to move the stock up dramatically. That bit of information is, how many patients are currently alive in the trial.
I believe even a number as low as 40 is saying our vaccine is a game changer, but I think the number could very well be 60 or more, which clearly would be huge. Clearly I'm not one that believes in all the FDA's acceptance criterias, I believe in what I can clearly see. All anyone needs to know is that with over 300 GBM patients treated over more than a decade, the last of which were done roughly 4.5 years ago, with SOC treatment perhaps 15 would have been anticipated to be alive. Our trial may have four or more times that many, how can anyone deny a tremendous benefit when using our vaccine.
I certainly hope we hear more than this at the Annual Meeting, but if there were only one thing we learned, I hope it would be that one.
Gary
I don't believe it's correct to say our cells kill the virus, I believe our cells increase blood production, and the additional blood works to clear up the pneumonia, regardless of what's causing the pneumonia. This actually greatly improves the potential of our drug, as it will still be needed after coronavirus completely disappears. Someone more medically knowledgeable please correct me if I'm wrong.
I would hope that in the next few days we learn more about what's happening elsewhere in the world. I've got to believe that Israeli dosing hasn't stopped at 7 patients, nor have I heard of what's happening in Germany. Now there are reports that some use may be occurring here in the U.S., I would hope that in the next week or less we get some more information about both the numbers that are being dosed, where they are, and finally how the patients are doing.
If in fact PLX-PAD is a game changer that dramatically lowers the likelihood of death, and if we truly have hundreds of thousands of doses, or more, and substantial thawing devices, then normal life could resume much sooner. Why? Because if we can eliminate the death threat, say to no worse than normal flu, we should be able to accept what happens as people get the disease, start to develop pneumonia, then get their dose of PLX-PAD and in most cases not require hospitalization.
Certainly we still need a vaccine to limit this threat in the future, but if we can cut the death threat to a fraction of a percent, we should also be able to reduce the threat of common flu substantially as well, in short, on a continuing bases we'll be saving lives.
Again, if anything I've indicated above is medically wrong, please correct me.
Gary
Thanks, that was from me and I believe I've expressed essentially the same views here. In general that site has had little action, and frankly I wish more were being said there, so I chimed in after some posts appeared there.
I never know where someone might learn something that has them look deeper into this, or any other stock. I believe that when the right person looks at this stock they see tremendous potential. This stock is wrong for many people, simply for one reason, it's not big enough, they won't be interested until it has a market cap of one or more billion dollars, that's true of both individuals, and Institutions.
Just last week we gained enough that Institutions that don't invest in anything under $5 would invest, so we may see more Institutional investment shortly, and we could also see the company raising funds because a broker came to them with perhaps tens of millions of shares an Institution would like to purchase through such an offering. I'm of the belief that many stock offerings are made by brokers who know who will buy the shares before they ever approach the company to consider an offering.
Many years ago it was very different. Major brokerages would participate in offerings, the CEO's and others would go on road shows to interest potential investors, and as a small investor you'd be privileged to be invited to a road show presentation, or participate in the offering with a few hundred shares at slightly below the market price, and with no brokerage commission. Today it's primarily Institutions that attend conferences held at brokerages, and who share new offerings. The small investor can really only hope to go along for the ride when the Institutions determine the time is right to move a company to a dramatically different trading range. Of course positive news works to make it happen, but the degree of the move can be greatly effected by Institutional action. I believe that with just a little more positive news the Institutions will help drive PSTI to a multi-billion dollar market cap.
Gary
You may be right, but it's also possible that a multi-million dollar expansion of their manufacturing capability may be warranted, and the money they're bringing in may not support that kind of growth. Some of America's biggest companies often routinely sell stock to grow even bigger, and investors are well rewarded by the growth of the corporation.
I don't fight dilution when I believe it's for the right reasons. Sometimes that reason may be to stay in business, as they're not earning money. In other cases it's to grow. I believe this company is at the point where they no longer need to dilute to stay in business, but they may be at the point where they'll need it to grow. The good news is if they do, they'll be getting far more money for each share they need to issue.
Gary
I'll go for A = $.27 B = $1.35
Gary
I don't know why the concern about 1 billion shares authorized now, I didn't hear about the company till right before the end of last year, and it was a billion shares then, when I bought in. A company with billions of shares issued can still be worth many dollars, just look at the market cap and it proves what I'm saying. Look at Apple, over 4 billion shares outstanding, does anyone doubt it's worth.
I'm not suggesting that PCTL will grow to the size of AAPL, but could it reach the Nasdaq which requires a $4 price to be listed, absolutely. What sort of market cap do people think it would have if it's units can be found in say 100 hospitals, how about 1000. What if other units are found in agriculture, petroleum, etc. My point is, this company could easily grow to a market cap of double digit billions, and triple digits is not out of the question. No, it won't be as big as AAPL, but right now it's an infant in a market that has tremendous growth potential, I expect that it will either grow tremendously, or be bought out for several billions, either way, current investors who remain will be very well rewarded.
Gary
Thanks, you're probably right. It would be nice to hear from the German's, I certainly hope that when we do that we'll hear about far more than 7 patients who've been dosed.
It would also be nice to hear more about the numbers now tested in Israel. Given the finding for the first 7, I can't believe they haven't dosed a lot more. I know it's not common to report on clinical trials, but this isn't a common clinical trial, however they may have determined to treat it that way for at least a matter of some weeks. I do not believe they'd have a problem getting hundreds of people enrolled in Israel, though I don't know how many they have on ventilators. I believe people on regulators are sedated, either they, or their families should agree to use in a trial situation before they're added to a trial.
Gary
There is another possibility to consider, as long as the share price is close to, but doesn't exceed the price of the warrant. That possibility is actually paying slightly over share price to convert the warrants to shares. Why would one do that, because a purchase of tens of millions of shares, or more, could easily drive the share price up to well over the warrant price. The key would be having the resources to do so, in addition to wanting those shares.
Something else to consider of course, wrt our CEO is that she has inside knowledge, she may know that $.22 will be a bargain in a matter of weeks, or months, but with what she knows, she'd be in violation of SEC rules if she bought at this time on the open market. I'm not a securities expert, but I don't believe she'd be in violation to purchase warrants she owns that are due to expire, even if it's at a premium to the stock price. Please correct me if I'm wrong about that.
As for others holding warrants, the same logic applies, if your open purchase would drive up the price of the stock, purchasing the warrants at a slight premium may be a smart move as you're getting the shares at a fixed price as well as providing operating funds for the company.
If the warrants are converted, I don't believe it would be reported until the financials are filed for the second quarter, it would probably hardly be noticed by then. I for one don't believe they're trying to hold the stock down, below the warrant level intentionally, if they were, why would they do an offering when they could have received as much or more money from warrant conversion. I believe it's a nice conspiracy theory, but like so many such theories, nothing will ever be proven.
Gary
I think every now and then it's nice to go into dream mode, and think about how well things could come out in the not that distant future. For example, I fully believe that a small part of my investment, which wasn't that great in the first place, could buy me a new Tesla.
Think about it, if as many believe this company is trading for dollars before the end of this year, let's say it reaches $5, at that point if you're looking at something selling for $100K or less, it will cost you 20K shares of PCTL. While I have substantially more than that, given that I bought at just under $.007 cents, that would say I purchased a Tesla for less than a $140 investment. That's a nice dream that could come true.
Perhaps it won't happen this year, I actually wouldn't want it until early next, as that's when it becomes a long term gain, but the point is, it's a nice dream that can come true. Certainly we have a long way to go, but can you imagine the U.K. placing a large order for our machines, I can. Can you see it going into hundreds of hospitals here, or being used by all sorts of service companies that clean and sanitize office and other industrial spaces overnight, I can. Where will we be in a year, very hard to say, who know, perhaps I'll be able to buy that Tesla from $70 or less worth of stock, i.e. 10K shares.
Gary
I think we all need to be ready to ignore the financial data specified in the report, as it no doubt will be quite negative. We know that's not where the company is today, but those old financials must be posted to bring us current. Likewise the Annual Report when issued isn't going to say financially we're in great shape, not even the just completed quarter.
What's important is, the company is still in business, and business is getting better every month. Yes, in part it's because of coronavirus, which is making everyone concerned with better sanitation, but it's also because we have a great line of products that are needed in many industries. When coronavirus is long gone this company should still be prospering.
By the way, I know our products are made here in the U.S., but I've gathered that some components come from China, or elsewhere, does anyone know that I'm correct in what I understand. I don't know if the company has the capability of making everything that they may be purchasing offshore, or have other American companies that could currently build them. If so, no problem, if not it may be something they would be wise to establish over time. Don't get me wrong, I believe foreign components will generally still be available, but problems at times could delay deliveries, it would be nice to have local suppliers, even if it's at a higher cost.
Gary