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.
As of June 30, 2016 they had $ 17,213,810 in cash. How in the hell do they keep paying these big dividends to the preferreds?
Yah, I wish I would have ran away at least by the end of last year, even though I was upside down then too. Just hopin for a miracle here I guess.
Well, shit, looks like it may hit .01
Sure need one, BAD!
Bio-AMD, Inc. Second Quarter Update
August 16, 2016 08:30 ET
DARESBURY, UNITED KINGDOM--(Marketwired - Aug 16, 2016) - Bio-AMD, Inc. and Bio-AMD UK Holdings Ltd., our majority owned medical devices subsidiary (together "Bio-AMD", "We" or the "Company") (OTCQB: BIAD) here provides a second quarter update.
COAG
Following withdrawal of a development partner for our Point of Care ("PoC)" prothrombin time/international normalized ratio ("PT/INR") monitoring system development project earlier this year the Company has actively sought a new, suitable partner to continue the development of its COAG technology. COAG is aimed at patients using Warfarin based oral anticoagulants to enable them to more easily manage their medication dosage and coagulation within a safe therapeutic range.
We continue to believe that our clinically verified COAG test strip, based on a direct mechanical rather than electrochemical measurement of clotting time, is best in class. Electrochemical devices are inherently susceptive to confounding factors, such as other medical conditions, which have caused fatal measurement inaccuracies. The US Food and Drug Administration is very much alive to these issues and has proposed tightened accuracy guidelines, which the Company believes it can easily meet with COAG.
The current PoC and self-test PT/INR market, projected to grow to around $1 billion p.a. in the next few years, is currently dominated by a single company's electrochemical based device. In July of this year this dominance was amplified when the former #2 PoC PT/INR monitor, also an electrochemical device, was voluntarily withdrawn from the market by its maker on FDA advice, following a FDA investigation into accuracy concerns. Another planned device for self-test, based on an electrochemical test strip supplied to a global company for professional PT/INR testing, has recently been abandoned. We believe that these developments reflect, in some part, the challenges of accuracy and FDA requirements, current and prospective.
Our COAG test strip has demonstrated that it can deliver market leading accuracy and reliability by a direct, mechanical coagulation measurement, even prior to optimization in a final device. We believe that our COAG strip is the ideal solution to current PoC PT/INR measurement accuracy issues. The Company has engaged with and has provided information to a number of interested parties active in PoC and coagulation testing in its efforts to find a replacement development partner for COAG. Discussions are ongoing.
MIDS Project Commences
The Company, in partnership with a nano-cap medical detection technology company has commenced the first stage of development of the Company's novel MIDS universal immunoassay device technology ("MIDS Project").
This development is initially focused on applying our patented MIDS technology into a rapid-test, PoC cardiac event detection device able to process High Sensitivity (HS) Troponin tests. These HS tests can currently only be assayed on large, expensive central laboratory equipment. Currently work is underway to confirm and demonstrate that the MIDS technology platform is accurate for the detection and quantitation of small quantities of magnetic nano-particles such as those used in these HS tests. Electronics design is in progress to produce the printed circuit board suitable for bench testing and optimising the design of the highly sensitive, bespoke Hall effect sensors central to the magnetic detection of target nanoparticles.
The Company believes there is a large potential market for highly accurate cardiac marker assays conducted by a hand held device at the Point of Care ("PoC"). The MIDS Project aim is to develop an easy to use, hand-held device which can achieve gold standard central laboratory accuracy, or better, at a fraction of the capital cost, with results delivered at the PoC within minutes.
About Bio-AMD, Inc.
Bio-AMD has two main majority owned UK subsidiaries: Bio-AMD UK Holdings Limited, a technology developer for medical diagnostic devices; and WOCU Ltd, the owner of the WOCU®, a global currency data reference source for application in financial markets. (www.wocu.com).
To find out more about Bio-AMD (OTCQB: BIAD), visit our website at www.bioamd.com.
Forward-Looking Statements
Statements in this news release that are not statements of historical fact are forward-looking statements, which are subject to certain risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements can often be identified by words such as "expects," "intends," "plans," "may," "could," "should," "anticipates," "likely," "believes" and words of similar import. Forward-looking statements are based on current facts and analyses and other information that are based on forecasts of future results, estimates of amounts not yet determined and assumptions of management. Actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied by forward-looking statements due to a variety of factors that may or may not be foreseeable or within the reasonable control of the Company. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements. Additional information on risks and other factors that may affect the business and financial results of the Company can be found in filings of the Company with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, including without limitation the section entitled "Risk Factors" in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015 filed on March 30, 2016, and in Company reports filed subsequently thereto. Except as otherwise required by law, the Company disclaims any obligations or undertaking to publicly release any updates or revisions to any forward-looking statement contained in this news release to reflect any change in the Company's expectations with regard thereto or any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statement is based.
I'm still around, and still hold a small position here.
JJ
That suit was dismissed 2 weeks after filing, FYI. http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/2l5be5fqc/new-york-eastern-district-court/montenegro-et-al-v-xpresspa-at-term-4-jfk-llc-et-al/
copperslash Wednesday, 08/10/16 06:40:10 PM
Re: None
Post # of 65975
Lawsuits? Recent lawsuit (2015) against XpresSpa three employees at JFK Terminal 4 location filed for overtime pay under Fair Labor
Standard Act
Hardly anything to get excited about as an investor
400 share trade at .046 up 64.49%. Better than a poke in the eye.
Another update would be nice.
If you will look at MARA's 8Ks on their settlements you will find this language in some, if not all, of them also. This is paragraph 2 of their last 8-KA:
"The Company believes that the settlement agreement has been entered in the ordinary course of the Company’s business and has not been filed as an Exhibit hereto in accordance with Item 6.01(10)(ii) of Regulations S-K under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended."
kennypooh Monday, 04/25/16 12:33:48 PM
Re: Rainmaker80 post# 65056
Post # of 65081
I disagree!
Quote:1. Cliff confirmed to many that there was only the one time payment
If both parties to the settlement agreed that something specific regarding the agreement was not to be disclosed for 6 years..little Cliff would not legally be able to confirm that to anyone would he???
Quote:2. The documents stated a 'one time' payment.
The documents stated exactly what both parties agreed on and wanted them to say or imply, not what you wanted them to say? .
The ZTE case involved many ZTE affiliates (as evidenced from the separate lawsuits filed around the world) so it's my opinion that today's 8k filing is just the first of more settlements to possibly come from patent specific and location specific negotiations from the same case.
April 25, 2016, Vringo, Inc. and its affiliates (the “Company”) entered into a Confidential License Agreement (the “Agreement”). Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, the Licensee will pay the Company a one-time lump sum payment of $8.9 million within 30 days following the execution of the Agreement and the Company will grant to the Licensee a non-exclusive, non-transferable, worldwide perpetual license to certain patents and patent applications owned by the Company. The Company believes that the Agreement has been entered in the ordinary course of its business and, accordingly, it has not been filed as an exhibit hereto in accordance with Item 6.01(b)(10)(ii) of Regulation S-K under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.
That's what I thought they were doing but never saw it done that way before. Why not simply vote whether or not to approve the R/S by whatever ratio they decide between 1:2 to 1:10 and set forth a reduction in the A/S? Pretty weird way they're doing it, IMO.
I'm a bit confused by this proxy statement. Paragraph 2 they're going to increase the A/S from 50M to 100M shares but you go to paragraph 3 and they seek approval to do a 1:2 to 1:10 R/S AND proportionately reduce the A/S. Are they 1st wanting to raise the A/S to 100M shares and THEN do the R/S with a proportionate reduction of the A/S? That's what I'm reading that they intend to do. Thoughts?
2. To approve an amendment to our Second Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, which increases the number of authorized shares of our common stock from 50,000,000 to 100,000,000;
3. To approve the grant of discretionary authority to the Board of Directors for up to a three year period (a) to amend our Second Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation to effect a reverse stock split of our common stock at a ratio within the range from one-for-two to one-for-ten, determine the effective date of the reverse stock split, and to proportionately reduce the number of shares of our common stock authorized for issuance or (b) to determine not to proceed with the reverse stock split and proportionate reduction in the number of shares of our common stock authorized for issuance;
Well, shit, my earlier post was not meant to come true. I just looked and saw the drop and 8K. Holy crap!!!
JJSeabrook Member Level Thursday, 04/14/16 09:52:46 AM
Re: dancingblonde post# 1385
Post # of 1398
You may have to move the decimal point over a space to get a really good buy. LOL
You may have to move the decimal point over a space to get a really good buy. LOL
Yes, approaching 4X average volume today. Not a pretty sight around this joint. They could at least send a stripper and a beer by every now and than as we watch our money fade away. LOL
From my recollection the only item voted down in the fall was an increase in the number of authorized shares. Other than that I believe every other item to be voted on passed, but I could be wrong.
nhra3361 Sunday, 04/10/16 06:00:43 PM
Re: Red Angus post# 64929
Post # of 64937
Red, Correct me if I am wrong but did they not just get voted down on pay raises back in the fall when the R/S vote was held? I also never remember management having held a conference call where share holders can ask questions. Anyone? Then again they have never been held accountable for anything.
They issued 703,667 shares of common stock for a $1,266,600 reduction of principal leaving a balance of $1,749,059. (Equivalent to $1.80 a share)
The interest rate was increased from 8% to 10%, such interest to be paid monthly. Upon maturity they will pay 102% of the aggregate principal amount in cash.
As for the warrants they can purchase an aggregate of 537,500 shares at a price reduced from $10 a share, originally, to $3 a share.
I don't know that I wouldn't have rather seen them go ahead and use cash to pay the note off, but I didn't expect they would do so now.
Rainmaker80 Wednesday, 03/09/16 11:49:35 AM
Re: billymayshear post# 64585
Post # of 64587
1. Actually, they reduced the principal and interest and dilution
I suggest you do the math before you make such incorrect statements
2. Usually in order to do those things you need to pay some sort of sweetener to a bond holder to do so.
3. Last time I checked, reducing principal, dilution on a convert, and interest was good for shareholders.
At one time Cuban owned more than 5% of VRNG's O/S. After a round of financing he no longer owned at least 5% of the O/S so IF he sold after that he would no longer be required to report it since he was no longer a 5% or more owner. I don't know his current status.
Bio-AMD, Inc.: MIDS Patent Grant in People's Republic of China
DARESBURY, UNITED KINGDOM--(Marketwired - Mar 3, 2016) - Bio-AMD, Inc. and Bio-AMD Holdings Ltd., our majority owned medical devices subsidiary (together "Bio-AMD," "We" or the "Company") (OTCQB: BIAD) is pleased to confirm that it has received a Certificate of Grant of a patent in the People's Republic of China ("PRC") for our Magnetic Immunoassay Detection System (MIDS) technology platform.
Patent Number ZL201180025701.5 was granted by the State Intellectual Property Office of the PRC, covering our MIDS "Immunoassay Apparatus Incorporating Microfluidic Channel."
The Company is delighted to have obtained this first territorial protection for its MIDS technology platform. The Company expects to receive further MIDS patent grants, having concurrently applied for protection in a global package of similar applications; in the U.S.A., the European Union and India. The Company believes that the PRC patent grant is indicative of the likelihood of grant in other territories, the PRC grant merely being "first past the post."
MIDS is an early stage technology platform capable of performing a wide range of immunoassay tests with significant potential for the Point of Care sector, expected to offer quantitative results and gold standard, "laboratory accuracy," at the patient's bedside, over a wide range of tests. Subject to resources being available, the Company intends to start work on the production of a MIDS technology bench demonstrator this year.
About Bio-AMD, Inc.
Bio-AMD has two majority owned UK subsidiaries: Bio-AMD Limited, a technology developer for medical diagnostic devices; and WOCU Ltd, the owner of the WOCU®, a global currency data reference source for application in financial markets (www.wocu.com).
To find out more about Bio-AMD (OTCQB: BIAD), visit our website at www.bioamd.com.
Forward-Looking Statements
Statements in this news release that are not statements of historical fact are forward-looking statements, which are subject to certain risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements can often be identified by words such as "expects," "intends," "plans," "may," "could," "should," "anticipates," "likely," "believes" and words of similar import. Forward-looking statements are based on current facts and analyses and other information that are based on forecasts of future results, estimates of amounts not yet determined and assumptions of management. Actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied by forward-looking statements due to a variety of factors that may or may not be foreseeable or within the reasonable control of the Company. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements. Additional information on risks and other factors that may affect the business and financial results of the Company can be found in filings of the Company with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, including without limitation the section entitled "Risk Factors" in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014 filed on March 30, 2015, and in Company reports filed subsequently thereto. Except as otherwise required by law, the Company disclaims any obligations or undertaking to publicly release any updates or revisions to any forward-looking statement contained in this news release to reflect any change in the Company's expectations with regard thereto or any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statement is based.
Contact Information
CONTACT:
Bio-AMD, Inc.
Tom Barr
CEO
+44 (0)8445 861 910
Direct link to oral argument> http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/OralArgRecordings/14/14-41384_2-29-2016.mp3
Recording from oral argument not out at this time. There were 4 cases getting argued today and RVP was 4th on the list. May not have been argued until this afternoon if they took them in order. http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-information/oral-argument-recordings
Oral argument today.
RVP
Encore Capital Group Enters Agreement to Sell Propel Financial Services to Prophet Capital Asset Management
- Encore Cites Expanded Opportunities to Invest Capital for Greater Returns
- Transaction Expected to Establish Propel’s Enterprise Value at More Than $340 Million
- Sale Expected to Generate More Than $150 Million of After-Tax Proceeds for Encore
SAN DIEGO — February 24, 2016 — Encore Capital Group (NASDAQ: ECPG), an international specialty finance company, today announced that it entered into an agreement to sell its wholly owned subsidiary Propel Financial Services to Prophet Capital Asset Management, an Austin, Texas-based Registered Investment Adviser. The transaction, which would establish Propel’s enterprise value at more than $340 million, is expected to close before the end of the first calendar quarter of 2016. Encore’s decision to divest Propel reflects the broadening array of opportunities within its global footprint and improving performance within its U.S. core business to generate greater returns on invested capital.
“Over the past few years, we’ve diversified Encore’s business by expanding into new global markets and asset classes. As a result, we now have access to attractive opportunities to deploy capital more efficiently at higher returns. In order to meet the higher return expectations of our other businesses, Propel’s tax lien investments require high levels of leverage, which is inconsistent with our longer term goal of deleveraging our balance sheet,” said Kenneth A. Vecchione, President and CEO of Encore. “This transaction provides significant benefits to Encore by improving our overall corporate invested capital returns, reducing our debt, providing liquidity, and allowing us to tighten our focus on expanding our market leadership in debt buying and servicing in the U.S. and around the world.”
Bobby Epstein, Managing Partner of Prophet Capital Asset Management, said, “This transaction is a perfect fit for us, as we value the opportunity to add a synergistic portfolio to our existing strategy. We have followed Propel's trajectory since well before Encore acquired them, and even explored a partnership several years ago. This business sector and Propel’s tax lien investments are not new to us, and we view this sizable transaction as a unique opportunity.”
“Propel plays a critical, consumer-friendly role in helping people address the real difficulty of not being able to pay their property tax bills,” said Vecchione. “Propel has a strong leadership team, and we are confident that it is well positioned to continue serving its customers and employees. We will work closely with Prophet Capital to ensure the smoothest possible transition.”
Jack Nelson, Propel’s President, co-founded the company in 2007 and has guided its growth in becoming one of the largest property tax finance companies in the United States. “We truly enjoyed and benefited from partnering with Encore since they acquired Propel in 2012. This combination helped us grow substantially as we expanded our business to 23 states across the country, and I am highly optimistic about our future under new ownership.”
Oral argument before the 5th Circuit one week from today.
We can certainly hope!
Retractable Technologies Incorporated (NYSEMKT:RVP) Sellers Increased By 36.36% Their Shorts
Passive and Active Investment NewsFebruary 17, 2016 By Patrick Sproles A+ A- EmailEmail PrintPrint The stock of Retractable Technologies Incorporated (NYSEMKT:RVP) registered an increase of 36.36% in short interest. RVP’s total short interest was 22,500 shares in February as published by FINRA. Its up 36.36% from 16,500 shares, reported previously. With 9,300 shares average volume, it will take short sellers 2 days to cover their RVP’s short positions. The short interest to Retractable Technologies Incorporated’s float is 0.22%. The stock is 0.00% or $0 after the news, hitting $2.8 per share. It is down 26.12% since July 13, 2015 and is downtrending. It has underperformed by 16.40% the S&P500.
Retractable Technologies, Inc. designs, develops, makes and safety syringes and other safety medical products for the healthcare industry. The company has a market cap of $79.23 million. The Firm markets VanishPoint and PatientSafe products. It has 16.61 P/E ratio. VanishPoint products are designed to prevent needle stick injuries.
The institutional sentiment decreased to 0.4 in Q3 2015. Its down 0.24, from 0.64 in 2015Q2. The ratio is negative, as 3 funds sold all Retractable Technologies, Inc. shares owned while 7 reduced positions. 1 funds bought stakes while 3 increased positions. They now own 1.32 million shares or 21.40% less from 1.68 million shares in 2015Q2.
Wealthtrust Axiom Llc holds 0.54% of its portfolio in Retractable Technologies, Inc. for 360,174 shares. Eam Investors Llc owns 331,286 shares or 0.19% of their US portfolio. Moreover, Cannell Capital Llc has 0.15% invested in the company for 113,101 shares. The Us-based Ancora Advisors Llc has invested 0.03% in the stock. Whitebox Advisors Llc, a Minnesota-based fund reported 179,401 shares.
Corporate Presentation 8-K http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=69920820
SNGX
Ain't NO judgment safe if it's getting reviewed by CAFC.
Like I said, it's corporate housekeeping, and nothing more. It's no big deal one way or the other. Just something that VRNG, as well as a TON of Delaware incorporated companies, will have to amend to comply with. No biggie, and doesn't mean squat. It's basically a NOTHING event that isn't really worth discussing.
BS! Don't read something into it that absolutely does not exist. Did you read the 8K? The court held in another case, In re VAALCO Energy, Inc. Stockholder Litigation, Consol. C.A., AS A MATTER OF LAW that it had to be changed. This had NOTHING to do with any institutional investor in any way, shape, or form. Read it!
Item 8.01 Other Events.
In light of a seeming conflict with Section 141(k) of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Vringo, Inc. (the “Company”) resolved that it is in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders that Article Fifth of the Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Company (the “Certificate of Incorporation”) be amended. The amendment relates to the required stockholders vote for removal of directors. In particular, Article Fifth, Section (2) of the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation contains “only for-cause” director removal provisions, and the Company does not have a classified board of directors or cumulative voting.
On December 21, 2015, the Delaware Chancery Court issued an opinion in In re VAALCO Energy, Inc. Stockholder Litigation, Consol. C.A. No. 11775-VCL, invalidating as a matter of law provisions of the certificate of incorporation and bylaws of VAALCO Energy, Inc., a Delaware corporation, that permitted the removal of VAALCO’s directors by its stockholders only for cause. The Chancery Court held that, in the absence of a classified board or cumulative voting, VAALCO’s “only for-cause” director removal provisions conflict with Section 141(k) of the Delaware General Corporation Law and are therefore invalid.
As such, on January 26, 2016, the Board of the Company proposed, deemed advisable and approved, subject to approval by the Company's stockholders, an amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation in order to provide that, consistent with Section 141(k) of the Delaware General Corporation Law and subject to the rights of the holders of any series of preferred stock then outstanding, any directors, or the entire board of directors, may be removed from office, with or without cause, by the affirmative vote of the holders of at least a majority of the total voting power of all of the then-outstanding shares of capital stock of the Company entitled to vote generally in the election of directors, voting together as a single class. The Board directed that such amendment be proposed at the Company's next annual or special meeting of the stockholders of the Company, whichever occurs first.
Consistent with the Board's action, and in light of the recent VAALCO decision, the Company will not enforce the “only for-cause” director removal provision that is currently present in the Certificate of Incorporation.
The 5th Circuit already took a look at this case and ruled last February that the injunction against BD, and other disclosure requirements imposed by the trial court, had their blessing when they refused to stay the injunction and further orders of the Court.
Doubt it.
Delaware is a corporate haven! You'll see TONS of corporations that will issue a similar 8-K.
Thanks for posting!
Just corporate housekeeping to comply with a new decision regarding corporate directors can be terminated with, or without, cause. Nothin to get excited about.
Panel judges are assigned 1 week before the beginning of the court week.
There IS a "possibility" BD "might" cave when/If they lose at the 5th Circuit, but I don't hold much hope for it.
I've seen posts that BD is hoping to break RVP by appealing. IF they (RVP) were worried about it I doubt they'd have given a huge amount of their cash away in divvies to preferreds. I feel they believe they have more than ample cash left to see this through to a potential SCOTUS decision.
When/IF the 5th Circuit affirms that injunction will remain in place. THAT might be reason enough at that point for BD to settle, but that's yet to be seen. I expect an appeal to SCOTUS.
Unfortunately, I don't see that $300M hitting the coffers in 2016. I fully expect BD will appeal any favorable ruling by the 5th Circuit, as would RVP if they were to lose there. I think this is headed to the Supremes. I don't believe the Supremes will grant a writ on it, but I still think it goes there. No money will come in until after it goes up to SCOTUS, IMO.
Another thing that I've found extremely discouraging is that the money they DID collect got divvied out to the preferreds and they gave NOTHING to the common shareholders. What will they do with the $300+M once they do collect it? Is that also all going to go to the preferreds????????
I think it'll pop on the 5th Circuit ruling and that it'll pop again when SCOTUS denies certiorari. I'll get back in again after the 5th Circuit pop before SCOTUS does anything. When cert is denied I'll likely sell again then as I'm not so sure the common shareholders will reap any rewards,but there should undoubtedly be a good pop once the collection of the judgment becomes absolute. 2 more huge catalysts coming that I see on the litigation end.
Best of luck!!!
noob, I think it gets affirmed on appeal and that's the time to hit the exit on the pop. I fully expect BD will announce that they will appeal to SCOTUS upon affirmation, IMO. Hopefully it's a BIG pop on the 5th Circuit affirming the judgment. That's what I'm looking for, personally.
The court’s goal is to issue an opinion generally within 60days after argument or submission.
Oral Argument Calendared for Retractable Technologies, Inc.
January 28, 2016 12:36 PM Eastern Standard Time
LITTLE ELM, Texas--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Retractable Technologies, Inc. (NYSE MKT: RVP) reports that oral argument before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has been set on the Court’s calendar for Monday, February 29, 2016 in New Orleans, LA.
Becton, Dickinson and Company (“BD”) filed this appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, No. 2:08-cv-16, to ask the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to reverse the judgments entered in favor of Retractable and render judgment for BD or remand the case for a new trial. The judgments at issue in this appeal stem from the jury finding that BD illegally engaged in anticompetitive conduct with the intent to acquire or maintain monopoly power in the safety syringe market and that BD engaged in false advertising under the Lanham Act. The judgments grant Retractable $352,000,000 in damages and attorneys’ fees as well as injunctive relief.
RTI manufactures and markets VanishPoint® and Patient Safe® safety medical products. The VanishPoint® syringe, blood collection, and IV catheter products are designed to prevent needlestick injuries and product reuse by retracting the needle directly from the patient, effectively reducing exposure to the contaminated needle. Patient Safe® syringes are uniquely designed to reduce the risk of bloodstream infections resulting from catheter hub contamination. RTI's products are distributed by various specialty and general line distributors.
For more information on RTI, visit our website at www.vanishpoint.com.
Forward-looking statements in this press release are made pursuant to the safe harbor provision of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and reflect our current views with respect to future events. We believe that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are accurate. However, we cannot assure you that such expectations will materialize. Our actual future performance could differ materially from such statements.
Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to: our ability to maintain liquidity; our maintenance of patent protection; the impact of current and future Court decisions regarding current litigation; our ability to maintain favorable third party manufacturing and supplier arrangements and relationships; our ability to quickly increase capacity in response to an increase in demand; our ability to access the market; our ability to maintain or lower production costs; our ability to continue to finance research and development as well as operations and expansion of production; the impact of larger market players, specifically Becton, Dickinson and Company, in providing devices to the safety market; and other risks and uncertainties that are detailed from time to time in RTI's periodic reports filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
Contacts
Retractable Technologies, Inc.
Douglas W. Cowan, 888-806-2626 or 972-294-1010
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Retractable Technologies, Inc.
NYSEMKT:RVP
Release Versions