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.
"Official"?? Like when "Howard Leonhardt", the past CEO appeared?
"Official"?? Doubt it. Highly. It's a logo and an "alias". Nothing "official", IMO.
Yes, you CAN continually have lower highs and lower lows AND have the stock close green.
The down "trend" line is solidly intact and a one day "green close" such as today, on a few, low vol end of day trades, does not alter that trend yet. It's in a solid, confirmed down trend. LOWER HIGHS and LOWER LOWS, still, yet to be broken.
If it closes "green" on ONE DAY, it means nothing regarding the "trend" or "trend" line.
Because one doesn't understand the basics, that doesn't change the truth. It's in a DOWN TREND, and it's a fact based on the trend line.
Look at the 50 DMA and the 200 DMA and look at the fundamental trend line. ONE day's close- is not how "trends" are established. LOWER HIGHS and LOWER LOWS, that's what it's doing as the "trend". A down trend, since the peak of .08 and subsequent rapid collapse from there.
It's continually making lower highs and lower lows. That's "what".
Look at a 3 month chart. Understand what it means. Know what a trend line is. It broke the 200 DMA twice in less than 20 days or so. It's touched the 200 DMA twice now in a week. It came within 1/10,000th of a cent (today's low was .0201), of breaking the 200 DMA avg again today, on the high AM vol. It opened down, not even at the previous day's close.
It breached the 50 DMA about 2 months ago, and has not come even remotely close to re-testing it, or even approaching it. It's DOWN TRENDING, which is a pattern of making lower LOWS and lower HIGHS. It's NOT a "one day" event. It's a trend.
It's been the majority of it's vol DOWN on high vol days and only "up" via small, $500 or similar "closing" trades like today. The vol has been dropping off significantly. The days it's traded down, are on higher vol, than the days they "walk it up" on a small, "up" vol, single trade like today.
It's also been "flat lining" - it's sits, many times a day now, where a single trade doesn't cross the "tape" for 30 minutes, often an hour or more. This is known as becoming ill-liquid.
If one can't read or understand the fundamentals of a solid down trend, via looking at a basic chart- there are many good books available or web sites that can explain how to understand, "basic" technicals.
A "trend" or "trend line" is NOT based on a single day's close. It's called a "trend" for a reason. Use at least a 3 month chart. Or, if the total collapse wants to be seen- then look at the peak of .08 on March 1st- 3rd, and the subsequent massive collapse, to now essentially 2 cents. A LOSS of about 70% or more, in about 3 months. THAT is a down trend and a solid one at that. As in LOWER HIGHS and LOWER LOWS for 3 months straight.
For all intents and purposes, it's a 2 CENT stock again. It's as simple as that.
Lower highs and lower lows. It's in a solid down trend and vol has dried up and any "up" days are on lower vol than down days.
It broke the 200 DMA twice now on May 20 and 21st, the 20th being on high vol. It touched the 200 DMA yesterday and looks like it's gonna test it again today possibly.
If it breaks the 200 DMA (.02), it doesn't have much support below that, clear to the one cent range IMO. Whenever vol dries up on this one, like it has now for about a month, it "ratchets" down, just like it's been doing for over a month now, with some large, single drop days that can exceed 10% or 20% often, in a blink.
It's gone pretty much "ill-liquid" when it trades less than 1 million shares a day, or often, less than 500,000 shares a day now (500K x .02 = only $10K a day in total dollar vol). One sell order of "size" when it's at this kind of volume, drops it real hard typically.
This 200 DMA area is either gonna hold, or it might be a 1.5 or 1 cent stock again soon, IMO.
"we would be training a lot more on the Nasdaq."?? The company, today, does not meet the minimum requirements to be listed on the NASDAQ?
(must mean "TRADING", not "training" on NASDAQ), in any event, the company does not meet the minimum requirements today, to be traded on the NASDAQ.
http://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsroom/securities/b/securities/archive/2012/04/27/new-nasdaq-2-3-initial-price-listing-standards.aspx
The "reported revenues" for Q-1, 2014 were off-set by a huge increase in their cost structure, resulting in a larger operational loss in Q-1, 2014 than in Q-1, 2103 (yr over yr). The "revenue" made no difference essentially, to their dire financial situation.
Latest 10Q, PAGE 5:
Revenue in Q-1 2014 was 322,572 - 94,446 (cost of sale) = gross revenue/income of $228,126.
SG&A (sales/marketing, general and admin.) expenses for Q1, 2014 and Q1, 2013 were:
Marketing, general and administrative expenses:
Q1 2014: 838,329
Q1 2013: 370,533
Thus costs/expenses increased by 838,329 - 370,533 = 467,796 or more than twice the gross "revenues". ALL THE REVENUE IN THE WORLD, does not matter, if your expenses/costs outpace and grow faster than the revenue. There are many, many, many companies with $1 BILLION or more in "revenue", but they can't make a "profit" or a net income to save their lives and thus are teetering on BK.
So, COSTS/expenses more than doubled from 370,533 to 838,329, off-setting any effect of "revenues" increasing by the approx. $228,126.
This resulted in an operational loss for Q-1, 2104, that was greater than the same period 1 yr ago:
Net loss from operations Q1 2014:(620,923)
Net loss from operations Q1 2013: (531,084)
(parenthesis equals a "loss", thus 620,923 is a larger loss, than same period 1 yr ago)
Despite a huge increase in their cost/expenses for SG&A, their "R&D" expense line/spending essentially collapsed to near nothing, in the same period, barley $10K for the entire Qtr.
Research and development Q1, 2014: 9,857
Research and development Q1, 2013: 163,974
A collapse in R&D spending, is never a "good thing" for a medical/bio-tech "research and development" based company, IMO, especially one, supposedly trying to conduct phase II/III level "research trials". Companies in the biotech, pharma, and high tech arenas thrive on their R&D spending; most boast when they can increase R&D spending, to increase the chance at new products and filling their "pipelines", let alone completing the "R&D" trials and similar, already underway.
Nothing "got better" financially, IMO.
"revenues" and "partnerships" and "trials" and adding "key team members" - it's not "new"??
In 2008, Leonhardt, in this public PR was "projecting" sales/revenues, as in "soon" of $20 MILLION dollars in 2009. $20 MILLION "projected", big ones? How did that work out?
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=asecNvIZ.xXI
Or, in this "PR" from July 2008, changing CEO number 4, "Pinon", and in the "PR" talking about "regulatory approval" of Myocell, clear back then, as if it was "close".
http://www.bizjournals.com/southflorida/stories/2008/06/30/daily39.html
Or this one, with CEO "Groth", clear back in 2010, talking about "Centers Of Excellence" and a MIDDLE EAST "deal" (where have those terms been used before?)
http://www.firstwordpharma.com/node/655954?tsid=17#axzz346TZidYB
There's "PR" along the same lines, as far back as one wants to go in BHRT's public (even pre public 2007 and similar "PR") history, IMO. All about "partners" and "deals" and "revenues" and "sales" and "trials" and "strategic", etc
"Phase 3 Myocell"?? Where? When? Total R&D spending in Q-1, 2014, was less than $10K, under "research and development expenses" on the 10-Q filing? A phase III trial is being run on about $3K a month? There hasn't been any phase III trial "advancing" in years that I'm aware of reading about, except that "MIRROR" had "started" about 1 yr ago and "ONE PATIENT WAS ENROLLED in Mexico". Other than that, "MIRROR" the word, or any description of the "trial" did not appear in a word search of the Q-1, 2014, 10-Q filing, to my knowledge?
http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/bioheart-announces-phase-iii-mirror-trial-for-myocell-initiated-otcqb-bhrt-1807938.htm
Note in that "PR" the words "up to". As in "up to" 35 centers and "up to" 126 patients over a 12 month period, etc. "Up to", means, IMO, anywhere between greater than 1 and less than 35 or greater than 1 and less than 126. "Normal" wording, IMO, regarding a statement of enrollment would be more like, "The trial will enroll a MINIMUM of 94 patients to meet the end point criteria and a maximum of 126." When a trial is "designed", as to be statistically "relevant", the lower number for enrollment must already be defined. It's not an open ended, or unknown number, as in "up to", not that I'm aware of, or familiar with?
Same "PR", almost 1 yr ago now, also stated the following:
"The FDA has placed a hold on the request for an Expanded Access protocol using MyoCell in part because the proposed expanded access study would likely interfere with the clinical development of MyoCell and/or interfere with developing market approval. Bioheart intends to continue enrollment in the MIRROR trial while hold items are addressed with the FDA. In addition, Bioheart plans to initiate part 2 of the MARVEL trial using the J&J MyoStar™ Catheter to deliver MyoCell to CHF patients."
I'm not aware of any subsequent info stating that the "MARVEL" part 2, has ever been "re-initiated" as of today or that any "FDA hold" issues have been "resolved" or whatever the case was? Never have seen any "PR" to further clarify that, not that I'm aware of? What "hold items" needed to be "addressed" with the FDA, and when/how did they get "addressed", if ever?
"The past is irrelevant"?? The "past" is highly relevant IMO, as it shows BHRT has been struggling financially, clear back to the IPO date. They were de-listed from the NASDAQ after only about 1 yr and then, 2 yrs or so after the IPO, July 2010, had a major loan go into default (B of A loan, resulting in the creation of Northstar), as in, BHRT has been in continual financial decline and struggles. A stock price decline of 98% or more, since the IPO, combined with massive common share dilution, is hardly a glaring "success", IMO.
I think to many, it's a logical question: If they couldn't "get it done" when it was a $5.25 stock, with the company valued at $70 million or whatever the case was, if they couldn't "get it done" or raise any significant funds on IPO day or any day in the yr after that at $3 a share or later at $2 a share or at $1 a share or at $0.75 a shares, etc, then why/how would they be likely to "get it done" when it's now about a 2 cent stock, with barely an $11 million market cap, highly diluted from IPO (less than 20 million shares on IPO day, to now over 466 MILLION shares and rising, today) - if in all that time, they never could raise any single, lump sum of significant "funding", or attract any partner or significant "financial investment/infusion", but only continue to dilute and use "ASHER" and every form of odd-ball "financing" and "loans" and hanging-on and the likes for years, then why, why now, as a 2 cent stock, would they suddenly get "large funding" or would the "trials", trials that have been parked and not advancing since 2009 essentially, 1 yr within the IPO date, if they couldn't move them forward since clear back then, then how/why now, as a 2 cent, low market cap, highly diluted stock?
Those are logical questions and the past is a huge part of the "story", IMO.
The "future", in the opinion of their 10-K auditor's warnings and in the "going concern" and other warnings of Sr. Mgt themselves, is "daunting" to say the least, IMO. The future is "bright"? Based on what criteria? They're "borrowing" and using "related part advances" and convertible debt "financing" and 10's of millions of warrants, etc, to, essentially, "hang-on", as recent as what was conveyed in the most recent 10-Q filing?
BHRT used to be on the NASDAQ and we delisted after only about 1 yr. A very "short run" as a "listed" company.
They had one of the worst IPO's in at least recent, if not all, IPO history, at least the past 20 or 30 yrs of IPO history, according to commentary I've read. Netting only about $1.5 million (after costs), even despite the then, CEO buying up some of the shares himself. (they initially stated they'd raise between about $40 to $70 MILLION on the IPO, continually lowering their target amount)
http://venturebeat.com/2008/02/20/bioheart-a-new-record-for-ipo-futility/
http://venturebeat.com/2008/02/19/three-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust-bioheart-makes-it-across-the-ipo-goal-line-but-with-little-to-show-for-its-struggles/
There were many companies that went public in 2008, raising about $28 BILLION dollars. 2008 for example included IPO's for Visa, American Water Works, Cardionet, MAKO Surgical, among others. BHRT ended up being the worst performing IPO of year 2008.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/12/31/ipos-idUSN3138728020081231
http://www.marketfolly.com/2009/01/how-some-2008-ipos-fared.html
BHRT see link above, finished DOWN 85% on the yr of its IPO, bottom of the list.
They did not have a major IPO "sponsor" like Morgan, Citi, UBS, or Lehman or JP or Merrill. Their IPO was via a rather small, relatively unknown underwriting firm of I believe "Dawson James Securities, Inc". They went through/fired several underwriters in their attempt to go public, according to several articles/stories.
http://www.pehub.com/2007/10/bioheart-changes-ipo-terms-and-underwriters/
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2007/10/15/bioheart-cuts-ipo-price/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0
BHRT went public in Feb. 2008 and was DE-LISTED only about Feb. 26th, 2009, only about ONE YEAR later (which in itself, could possibly be some sort of new record perhaps, lasting only 1 yr from NASDAQ to being delisted, not sure?)
http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2009/02/26/393349/160467/en/Bioheart-Inc-Receives-Notice-of-Delisting-From-The-NASDAQ-Capital-Market.html
The stock has been essentially straight down, in decline, with a few "pops" along the way, since the IPO. A "max" chart shows the stock today, is down from $5.25 a share on IPO date, to now about 2 cents, or a decline of approx. 99.59%.
Since the present CEO took over in Jun. 2010 (number 3 CEO since IPO, I believe, maybe 4th? Leonhardt, Groth, Tomas and I believe right before IPO, was maybe a 4th person?) the stock has declined from about the .45 cents to .50 cent range when Tomas took over, to now about the 2 cent range, with a low of .0063 (6/10ths of one cent in Dec. 2013), or approx. a 95% decline.
For yr 2008 there were 43 U.S. IPOs which raised at least $50 million.
Total U.S. IPO proceeds were $28 billion, in 2008.
87 U.S. companies filed for IPOs (2008) but then withdrew this year" (that's typical for well-led companies IMO, they pull the IPO if the timing is not right and wait, you read of it happening all the time, even in recent yrs)
List of the majority of U.S. exchange 2008 yr IPO's and amount raised in $millions of dollars: note, it's the dollars raised listed, not the share price. As in Visa raised $17,864 million or $1.7 BILLION dollars. Cardionet, a medical company- raised $81 million (note, two raised over $1 billion) (bottom of list BHRT at just under $6 million, of which they only "netted" something like $1.5 million after costs)
Visa $17,864
American Water Works $1,247
Intrepid Potash $960
GT Solar International $499
Colfax Corp $337
Williams Pipeline Partners $325
Western Gas Partners $309
RiskMetrics Group $245
Hatteras Financial $240
Navios Maritime Acq Corp $220
Whiting USA Trust I $217
American Capital Agency $200
Safe Bulkers $190
RHI Entertainment $189
Rackspace Hosting $187
Verso Paper $168
Pioneer Southwest Energy $156
Cascal B.V. $144
Grand Canyon Education $126
Britania Bulk Holdings $124
Energy Recovery $119
IPC The Hospitalist Company $83
CardioNet $81
ArcSight $61
China Distance Education $61
Chardan 2008 China Acq Corp $55
Real Goods Solar $55
MAKO Surgical $51
North Asia Investment Corp $50
China Mass Media Corp $48
ATA Inc $46
Heritage-Crystal Clean $21
BioHeart $5.78 (we'll add the decimal since it's so low)
Figured today would be the "selling day". Was going to post last night, but didn't get time.
I'd been watching for it to be "walked up" (on low volume) to the .025 area, and figured that would trigger another seller/share dumping point. For the past week, they brought it "up" but on extremely low vol, like $6K or so, total vol traded on several trading days (that's like qty-12, $500 trades in an entire day, but the mm/brokers would widen the spread to close it "up" like 3 to 5% on several days, on maybe a $300 closing buy order).
There are just a LOT of "in the money" warrants and shares and "convertible shares" out there now, like in the 10's of MILLIONS with strike or grant prices in the 1 CENT range (on floorless convertible there is no bottom price) (see latest 10-Q, 10-K filings, just read up on the millions of warrants alone, that are now in the 1 cent to about 1.6 range). If a "big boy" wants to unload, IMO, it will be done in "cycles/ratchets" just like we've been seeing. They can double their money, on short term money, if they can unload 1 CENT shares at anything above 2 cents or so, or even make 50% return on their money at the .015 to .0175 range.
They sell a load on high volume days like the past several weeks (dropping 10% to 20% in a blink) then let it recover a bit, the mm/brokers "walking it up" over a period, say one week, on tiny, $500 to $1000 buys, then when it gets back up "in range" they sell another large chunk off, IMO.
There is just too much dilution and share "overhang" IMO, for the "PR" blasts to have much effect. I mean, when you're down to spending $5K for a "month's worth" of paid "penny promotion" and put out a PR about every few days about "something" (talk, conference, award, whatever), it tells me, IMO, someone wants to sell stock, and a lot of it, probably.
Past 14C Filings spoke of "financing" for "trials"- but did it ever happen?
14C filed on 1-7-2013 to increase "authorized" outstanding shares from 200 MILLION to 970 MILLION, done only about 1 yr and 5 months ago. And now ANOTHER 14C is being filed to take it to 2 BILLION.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1388319/000114544313000041/d30065.htm
But what did the 1-7-2013, 14C filing say on PAGE 30:
"INCREASE AUTHORIZED COMMON SHARES
Material Terms, Potential Risks And Principal Effects Of The Increase of Authorized Common Shares
Our Board of Directors and the consenting majority stockholders have adopted and approved resolutions and an amendment to the Articles Of Incorporation to effect the increase of the authorized capital stock of the Company from two hundred million (200,000,000) shares of capital stock consisting of one hundred and ninety-five million (195,000,000) shares of common stock and five million (5,000,000) shares of preferred stock, both $.001 par value respectively, to nine hundred and seventy million (970,000,000) shares of capital stock consisting of nine hundred and fifty million (950,000,000) shares of common stock and twenty million (20,000,000) shares of preferred stock, both $.001 par value respectively. The Board of Directors and the consenting majority stockholders believe that the increase in authorized common shares is in the best interest of the Company and its stockholders because of a need to reserve shares for the conversion of convertible securities, raising of capital, and as an alternative to providing cash compensation. For example, the Company currently has up to 60,924,115 shares issuable upon the conversion of convertible securities.
The Company currently has up to 60,924,115 shares issuable upon the conversion of convertible securities and would require the additional shares of common stock in the event a convertible security holder exercises their right to such shares of common stock (of which none have requested conversion or are likely, in the Company’s opinion, to request conversion until additional shares are available). In addition, the Company has significant debt obligations (as disclosed in its financial statements), deferred compensation obligations, and is incurring additional affiliate debt as a member of the Board of Directors has, to cover expenses in the ordinary course of business, loaned the Company $153,300., in the last week. The Company will be issuing 10,000,000 restricted shares to an affiliate as consideration for debt forbearance (currently available in the float). The Company may, but has no definitive plans, reduce its debt obligations either through converting outstanding debt into equity (including possibly issuing restricted common stock to Board members and affiliates to reduce their debt obligations arising from funds loaned to the Company) or raise additional capital for general operations and to complete clinical trials essential to our business plan, through the sale of convertible debt or equity. Further, the Company can raise additional capital through the sale of common stock, at the Company’s discretion, pursuant to a Standby Equity Distribution Agreement dated as of November 2, 2011and registered pursuant to an effective Registration Statement (SEC File #333-179096) of the common stock on Form S-1 (to be updated on a Post-Effective Amendment), provided additional shares of common stock are available. However, the Company, at this time, has no plans to draw down from this Standby Equity Distribution Agreement, raise capital, or convert any debt obligation."
Sound familiar? BUT, did any major "clinical trial" get "advanced" or "move forward" OR COMPLETED (the 14C says COMPLETETION of clinical trials) since that time and ALL THOSE SHARES being not only "authorized" but now, more than 200 MILLION of them becoming "common trading shares" as they did get "issued" and as of today, each month, continue to be "issued"??
Or, how bout the 14C filing PRIOR TO THAT ONE on 8-16-2011. What did it say?
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1388319/000114544311000793/d28534.htm
"The amendment of the Articles of Incorporation of the Company to increase the number of authorized shares of the Company’s common stock, par value $0.001 per share, from 75,000,000 shares to 195,000,000 shares."
What did PAGE 3 SAY FOR EXAMPLE, in 2011:
"There is no current plan, commitment, arrangement, understanding or agreement, written or oral, regarding the issuance of common stock subsequent to the increase of the authorized shares."
Or what did PAGE 4 SAY IN 2011 14C for example:
"
The Company believes that this increase is in the stockholders’ best interests as it increases the availability of additional authorized, but unissued, capital stock to provide the Company with the flexibility to issue equity in financing transactions, in connection with the future acquisitions, as an incentive to employees, officers, directors and consultants and for other proper corporate purposes which may be identified in the future....
There is no current plan, commitment, arrangement, understanding or agreement, written or oral, regarding the issuance of common stock subsequent to the increase of the authorized shares.
In addition to the corporate purposes discussed above, the authorization of additional capital, under certain circumstances, may have an anti-takeover effect, although this is not the intent of the Board of Directors. For example, it may be possible for the Board of Directors to delay or impede a takeover or transfer of control of the Company by causing such additional authorized shares to be issued to holders who might side with the Board in opposing a takeover bid that the Board of Directors determines is not in the best interests of the company and our stockholders. The increased authorized capital therefore may have the effect of discouraging unsolicited takeover attempts. By potentially discouraging initiation of any such unsolicited takeover attempts, the increased capital may limit the opportunity for the Company’s stockholders to dispose of their shares at the higher price generally available in takeover attempts or that may be available under a merger proposal. The increased authorized capital may have the effect of permitting the Company’s current management, including the current Board of Directors, to retain its position, and place it in a better position to resist changes that stockholders may wish to make if they are dissatisfied with the conduct of the Company’s business. "
SOUND FAMILIAR????
NO "CURRENT" plans. and "financing" and "anti-takeover effect". EXACT SAME WORDING. But EVERY LAST ONE OF THOSE SHARES got used up and issued "for something" in the following approx. 2 yr period from that 14C filing, when ANOTHER 14C was then filed, taking the "authorized shares" from 200 MILLION to then 970 MILLION and now ANOTHER 14C has been filed to take it to 2 BILLION.
And NOWHERE along the way, did any "big finance deal" happen. And that was despite a "PR" such as the following being issued on Oct 15th, 2012 that Northstar was going to raise $20 MILLION in a "private placement" round. DID IT HAPPEN?
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/northstar-launches-20-million-private-113119817.html
75 MILLION to now 970 MILLION "authorized" and from 40 MILLION or so outstanding shares to now 460 MILLION plus and did a "big financing deal" ever happen or did one of the major phase II/III trials "GET COMPLETED", let alone, even "move forward" or progress since 2009/2010 time period? Not that I can see, IMO.
How can anyone claim to be "setting a date" of when a "major financing" deal would happen, unless they specifically have insider trading/corporate information?
The 14C being filed means one thing ONLY. That the "authorized" outstanding shares are being increased to 2 BILLION, from approx. the present 950 million. That is all a 14C means and nothing more can be "inferred" from it. The 14C is loaded with "forward looking" disclosures and other disclosures. It clearly states, the purpose of the authorized shares, can be for pretty much ANYTHING THE BOD determines them to be "needed" for, as long as it's related to "corporate purposes", as determined by them, with no shareholder or anyone else's input required or needed.
14C FILING, PAGE 51:
"Material Terms, Potential Risks and Principal Effects Of The Increase of Authorized Common Share
Our Board of Directors and the consenting majority stockholders have adopted and approved resolutions and an amendment to the Articles of Incorporation to effect an increase of the number of common shares of the Company that the Company may issue from nine hundred and fifty million (950,000,000) shares of common stock and twenty million (20,000,000) shares of preferred stock, both $.001 par value respectively, to two billion (2,000,000,000) shares of shares of common stock and twenty million (20,000,000) shares of preferred stock, both $.001 par value respectively. The Board of Directors and the consenting majority stockholder believes that the Increase in Authorized common shares is in the best interest of the Company and its stockholders because the increase in the number of authorized but unissued shares of Common Stock would enable the Company, without further stockholder approval, to issue shares from time to time as may be required for proper business purposes, such as providing for reserves that are often required when and if necessary to raise additional capital for ongoing operations, business and asset acquisitions, present and future employee benefit programs and other corporate purposes as we make every effort to become cash flow positive."
"OTHER CORPORATE PURPOSES" pretty much leaves it wide-open, that the BOD, upon their own choice, can issue new shares "from time to time" for ANYTHING THEY DEEM NECESSARY. It's in black n white.
BHRT does "financing deals" essentially every month, on-going, and has done so for many, many years. They are done via dilutive financing, typically using "convertible debt" of some kind, with steep discount provisions, or "warrants" and other, highly dilutive methods. They do "financing" constantly. They used so many shares, that in the past 1-yr period the outstanding shares more than doubled from about 190 MILLION to now over 460 MILLION.
From the latest 10-Q, just as the most recent examples- BHRT did "financing" as recent as April, 2014. They pour out shares like water for the most part, 10's of MILLIONS at a time, for everything from paying/settlement of common bills/advances/debt payments, to "financing" to "warrants" to "stock options" for insiders, to paying Northstar, etc. They more than doubled the outstanding shares, in less than the past, 1 year period.
Most recent 10-Q, PAGE 23/24: Recent examples of common stock shares being used for "bill paying" and "financing" and capital raising via "warrants" among other things-
"
In April 2014, the Company issued an aggregate of 3,839,832 shares of its common stock for services rendered valued at $43,250.
In April 2014, the Company issued 5,263,315 shares of its common stock in settlement of related party advances of $100,000.
In April, 2014, the Company issued 1,002,808 shares of its common stock in settlement of common stock subscriptions of $50,000
In April 2014, the Company issued 274,681 shares of its common stock as settlement of six months accrued interest on the Northstar note obligation.
In April 2014, the Company issued 18,383,774 shares of its common stock for service rendered valued at $180,511.
In April 2014, the Company issued an aggregate of 4,793,268 shares of its common stock in settlement of $67,500 convertible notes payable and $2,700 accrued interest.
In April 2014, the Company issued 11,918,181 shares of its common stock in connection with the exercise of warrants. Proceeds received was $136,000, of which $6,000 during the three months ended March 31, 2014."
Most recent 10-Q PAGE 14/15 (examples of BHRT doing on-going "financing" as recent as Feb/March 2014. They CONTINUALLY do "financing deals" to stay afloat. They are so low on cash at any given month/qtr, that these two deals were done to raise a total of about $135K dollars TOTAL. And the terms were horrible, giving the "finance house" a 45% and 47% discount on the convertible shares )
"Asher Notes (During this year)
During the three months ended March 31, 2014, the Company entered into a Securities Purchase Agreements with Asher Enterprises, Inc. (“Asher”) or affiliates, for the sale of 8% convertible notes in aggregate principal amount of $97,500 (the “Asher Notes”).
The Asher Notes bear interest at the rate of 8% per annum. As of the quarter ended March 31, 2014 all interest and principal must be repaid nine months from the issuance date, the last note due December 26, 2014. The Notes are convertible into common stock, at Asher’s option, at a 45% discount to the average of the three lowest closing bid prices of the common stock during the 10 trading day period prior to conversion. The Company has identified the embedded derivatives related to the Asher Notes.
These embedded derivatives included certain conversion features and reset provision. The accounting treatment of derivative financial instruments requires that the Company record fair value of the derivatives as of the inception date of Asher Notes and to fair value as of each subsequent reporting date which at March 31, 2014 was $153,564. At the inception of the Asher Notes, the Company determined the aggregate fair value of $214,346 of the embedded derivatives.
Daniel James Management
On February 19, 2014, the Company entered into a Securities Purchase Agreements with Daniel James Management (“Daniel”) for the sale of 8% convertible note in principal amount of $35,000 (the “Daniel Note”).
The Daniel Note bear interest at the rate of 8% per annum with all interest and principal due February 28, 2015. The Daniel Note is convertible into common stock, at holder’s option, at a 47% discount to the average of the three lowest closing bid prices of the common stock during the 10 trading day period prior to conversion. The Company has identified the embedded derivatives related to the Daniel Note. These embedded derivatives included certain conversion features and reset provision."
"buying"? It's net, down on the day ? It's down 1% right now. Any spikes "up" are on blocks of like $500, or less at a time. The past 2 days, it did about $6K max, total vol traded, each day.
What "MIRROR" news? "MIRROR", the word, let alone even a sentence with details, didn't appear even once in the latest 10-Q issued for 1st qtr, 2014.
Instead, we're getting "PR" about "talks" and "conferences" and now about $2,500 on-line training courses, that they would "split" (see last 10-Q) with this "globalstemcell" whatever group. Who of the 4 full time employees would be handling "trials" and medical "research", while the "Chief Science Officer" is off giving the $5K "hands on special" version of the training? (see training flyer on the training web site)
The entire R&D expense line entry, for the period of Q-1, 2014 was less than $10K. What "trials", especially a phase II or III "FDA" quality "trial" does one suppose are being conducted on about $3K a month, realistically?
Nowhere does it say ACCME "accredited"?
Also, the ACCME web site does not list them.
http://www.accme.org/find-cme-provider
Try searching the ACCME site, via their "find a CME provider" and see if anything about this "course" comes up in the results?
Using the words, "CME" does not imply or guarantee in any way that it is the ACCME that granted the recognized "accreditation". CME, simply means, "Continuing Medical Education" and nothing more. It does not imply who granted "accreditation". States can grant "CME" accreditation and recognize them as such. For example, various medical "professional organizations" can give CME credit courses, and then, via proper registration with ACCME or a particular State be "recognized" as "accredited".
Plug in the zip, 33325 and see if any "ACCME" stem cell training comes up?
"accredited" by who? What "accrediting" body?
When one states a course as being "accredited" in the field of education/higher learning/continuing professional education, it is "normal" in all instances I am familiar with, to state who/what body has granted/validated it as being "accredited". This is typically done at the State level (U.S. based) by various recognized agencies/boards, or by a well recognized "accreditation body" in the respective field/profession, etc.
I find no reference in the PR or on their linked web site or in the course material as to who "accredited" this course?
"CME" (medical profession) credits are typically given "accreditation" by the ACCME (Accreditation Council For Continuing Medical Education) or a respective State agency where the training is taking place. The ACCME web site allows a search of all "CME" credit, "accredited" course via zip code, state, field of study, etc.
A search of the ACCME site for "Stem" or "Stem Cell" and "Florida" in the search box results in 3 companies/firms offering CME "accredited" training, and none of those are listed as stemcelltraining.com or "bioheart" or any variations to that, that I could find, even leaving the state/zip code search field empty, reveal no "accredited" results by either the ACCME or State of Florida? So who is the "accreditation" body for this course? Universities, colleges, even private "trade schools", etc if "accredited", always state under what "accrediting" body they are recognized, IMO.
http://www.accme.org/
https://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/education-careers/continuing-medical-education/physicians-recognition-award-credit-system/accredited-cme-provider-resources.page
(AMA, American Medical Association description of CME "accredited" training)
An ACCME search will give either ACCME certified or a respective State certified, recognized course or trainer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accreditation_Council_for_Continuing_Medical_Education
For example, a simple search of "Florida University Accreditation" will reveal an instant result:
http://pharmd.distancelearning.ufl.edu/accreditation-popup/
"The University of Florida is accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC)"
This "PR" is vague IMO. It puts "accredited" in bold in the headline, but then nowhere, at least that I can/could find, does it list by who/whom this "accrediting" has been granted or is recognized? I would like to know who the "accrediting" body/State/medical association (whatever the case may be) is for this course?
From "Company Information Sheet" link: (bottom of page)
"These profiles are paid advertisements. Although we have a reasonable belief that the information in each profile is accurate, we cannot guarantee that the information is accurate."
One will not find such a "disclosure" on the SEC EDGAR filing database. Personally, it's one reason I strongly prefer the SEC, EDGAR database as a source of reliable "company information", when researching, doing "due diligence" and similar on any public traded, stock based company.
BHRT SEC filed "information sheets" are found here:
https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0001388319&owner=exclude&count=40&hidefilings=0
"EDGAR" is thee ONLY, "officially" recognized place to get SEC documents. It's the Securities and Exchange Commission operated and maintained database. It's the location/agency to which all U.S. based operations, public traded companies actually "transmits" any SEC document, when it's "filed" for official purposes.
https://www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml#.U45hi3JjXz5
"All companies, foreign and domestic, are required to file registration statements, periodic reports, and other forms electronically through EDGAR. Anyone can access and download this information for free. Here you'll find links to a complete list of filings available through EDGAR and instructions for searching the EDGAR database."
"the report" share count is not quite correct, or at least not displaying quite the "full story", IMO.
It lists the Shares Outstanding: 466,396,016 a/o May 06, 2014
This is correct per page 1, most recent filed 10-Q, for qtr ending March 31st, 2014, as "shares outstanding".
It however does not account for "fully diluted" shares, which would include all shares needed to cover things like warrants issued, "convertible bonds" that would need to be covered if converted, etc. "Fully diluted", takes into account all shares "issued" if all convertible securities were exercised. Convertible securities refers to all outstanding convertible preferred shares, convertible debentures, stock options and warrants, etc.
BHRT for example, has recently issued a LOT of warrants. See most recent 10-Q, PAGE 22, as just one example: Cassel was issued, " 5,207,630 ten year common stock purchase warrants, exercisable at $.0113 ". That's 5 MILLION shares that would become "free trading" common shares at ONE CENT if exercised. Pretty important, IMO, given the 1 cent strike price (they're "in the money" right now, as in they could double their money if sold as the price right now of about 2 cents).
"Fully diluted" is very important IMO, as the dilution is actually heavier than meets the eye, and would not be fully understood if one doesn't know the "fully diluted" number.
Most recent 10-Q, PAGE 10:
" Fully diluted shares outstanding were 498,696,292 and 222,688,816 for the three months ended March 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively."
So, there is actually close to HALF A BILLION "fully diluted" shares now, and per the recently filed form 14C, the "authorized" shares is being increased from about 950 MILLION, to 2 BILLION now.
To see the effect of these "fully diluted" shares becoming "free trading common stock" and adding to the dilution of the common shareholder, see most recent 10-Q, PAGE 24: (just in April, 2014, 11 MILLION more shares were "diluted" via one transaction of warrants)
"In April 2014, the Company issued 11,918,181 shares of its common stock in connection with the exercise of warrants. Proceeds received was $136,000, of which $6,000 during the three months ended March 31, 2014."
Thus, one can see from PAGE 10 of the most 10-Q, that the outstanding shares have more than DOUBLED in just the past, one year period. Dilution, in other words, and a lot of it.
BHRT SEC filed "information sheets" are found here:
https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0001388319&owner=exclude&count=40&hidefilings=0
This is the "EDGAR", U.S. Security and Exchange Commission, officially maintained "repository" of all U.S. public traded company, duly required, and duly filed SEC documents. (form 10-Q quarterly reports, 10-K annual reports, form 14C's such as the BHRT recent filing to increase their authorized outstanding shares to 2 BILLION, form 8-K filings, form 4's, etc). They're all there- in one officially maintained place. Easy to find and read.
Or, this is the BHRT corporate web site:
http://www.bioheartinc.com/
My personal preference is to only get company "information sheets" about public traded companies from the SEC filed documents as they are the most "official" IMO, should be the most accurate IMO, as they are typically audited by licensed, "fiduciary bound" CPA firms or similar (at least the annual 10-K) and must follow numerous SEC guidelines and laws in order to be "compliant". Any documents found on EDGAR will also, always be signed by the Sr. Corporate management, testifying to their accuracy.
Just my personal preference. The entire purpose for SEC documents like a quarterly 10-Q or an annual 10-K report, plus all the other forms one will find filed for any public traded company, is to be the public "information sheets" and legal "disclosures" available to investors, shareholders, govt. regulators, etc
Volume is GONE. It's totally "flat-lined" out. It did about $5K total yesterday in dollar's traded.
It's over an hour, almost 1.5 hours into the trading day now, and it's sitting, "parked" at 14,600 shares. That's about 14,600 X .0240 = $350.00 BIG ONES. Someone must be trying to buy maybe $500 worth, and won't raise their bid.
Price reached .08 on about March 3rd, 2014 or so, on over 10 million shares in volume, to .0235 and below .02 recently, which is about a 70% loss in value, in about a 3 month period. Stock is down about 99.60% on a "max" chart, going back to the IPO period around 2008. Since this CEO took over on about June 23rd, 2010 (PR released), the stock was about .45 cents then (June 10th, 2010 it was .50 cents) and is down about 95% since that date.
When the shares go essentially ill-liquid like this, any "financing", even the "convertible debt" type is gonna get harder and harder typically (terms will be worse most likely). Those "finance houses" want to know they can unload their shares when needed. When there's no dollar volume, that makes it tough, as any sell order of "size" is gonna rapidly cause the price to collapse.
Looks like it's gonna sit in the 2 cent range now, right near the 200 DMA, unless another major seller puts an order up anytime soon. Then, it might, IMO see that 1.5 cent or even 1 cent range that it saw, as recent as end of 2013, early 2014. Market cap is back at right around $11 million, dipping to $10 million and even a little lower on some of the recent, higher volume selling days.
Lots of "PR" and "presentations" and "talks" and what not, but no real share buying it appears. And no "big financing" deals or notable "progress" on any major phase II/III trials that I'm aware of.
What exactly is a "without a biased agenda"?
Could an exact description or list with details or something to that effect please be explained and elucidated?
It would be very helpful to understand what a "biased agenda" exactly is, how this "agenda" works, etc?
As in, "In my opinion, anyone without a biased agenda would also agree."
Thanks
No one will invest in a stock of a "medical research and development" and "FDA trials" supposed stock/company, when they SPEND MORE ON PENNY STOCK PROMOTION firms in a month, than their entire "R&D", monthly budget, IMO. Don't care how much they've "heard about it".
No more complicated than that. FDA phase II/III "trials" and actual "medical research" on about $3K a month "budget", but $5K goes to some penny stock "promotion firm" for one month's worth of "services"? Really? Nothing wrong with that picture?
And they have 4 full time and one part time "employee" (latest 10-Q) and just gave the two "important" people, 50% boosts in their base salaries and essentially a TRIPLE of their "total compensation" packages (including BONUSES), bringing the CEO total "comp package" to close to $1 MILLION a yr, at the same time that "R&D" spending went close to nothing for the quarter, and while their SG&A expenses doubled at the same time, from $370,533 same period last yr, to $838,329 Q-1 this yr (most recent 10-Q, PAGE 5 and last 10-K, "compensation table" PAGE 71).
I guess there's a reason people like the SEC and U.S. govt. regulatory system invented things like a 10-K and 10-Q, else, no one would ever know, would they? We'd sure never hear about any of those FACTS in all the good ole, "PR releases" or "blogs" or "podcasts", that's for certain, IMO.
"regarding trial status, financials, company goals,"
THAT is what a quarterly 10-Q and 10-K are for. They're the only "legally binding" documents in regards to any "status", and even then contain a mish-mash of "forward looking" disclosures and "what ifs" and "could/might/maybes", etc.
Regarding "trials", what so called, "status"? There is none, essentially. Last update to "MIRROR" was approx 1 yrs ago now, as "ONE PATIENT ENROLLED" and it didn't even appear, the word "MIRROR", literally did not appear in the latest, quarterly 10-Q. The other phase II/III "trials" have not advanced or progressed since about 2009/2010, going on almost 5 yrs now.
So, what "status" is there to "report"?
TOTAL "R&D" spending, for 3 months of Q-1, 2014, was $9,857 big ones. (Latest 10-Q, PAGE 5, line entry for "research and development" expenses)
So, a "medical research and development" company, doing, supposed FDA level/type phase II/III "trials", and "stem cell HEART research and product development", etc just spent a grand total of $9,857 / 3 = $3,285, PER MONTH, for what would be "trials" and other "R&D" product developments, etc for all of Q-1, the most recent quarter?
BUT, they just paid out $5K for ONE MONTH "of services" to a penny stock "promotion" firm?
WOW, IMO. If that isn't some "perspective", then I don't knwo what is, IMO. Stunning, in my view.
Another day, another "PR" and this one, specifically on a "penny stock promotion" site called "SmallCapVoice"? I've counted, and not even Apple for example, puts out this much "PR", IMO. It's getting to be it seems, around two or so "PR", "about something" a week. But interestingly, IMO, nothing ever "concrete" about actual progress on "MIRROR" or the other, past, phase II/III "trials" actually advancing or moving forward?
A PAY TO PROMOTE penny site (SmallCapVoice), who's "contact" page only lists an email address and a (512) area code (that'd be central Texas), but no physical address?
Here is the verbiage direct from the "SmallCapVoice" ole "disclaimer" page:
"IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER
PLEASE READ THOROUGHLY
The SmallCapVoice.com, Inc. SC Daily is an electronic publication, and is for informational purposes only. The SCDaily covers both client and non client issuers. Non client issuer's news is listed under other small cap news. SmallCapVoice is an electronic publication providing information on selected public companies. All companies profiled on this website pay cash, unrestricted stock or restricted stock to SmallCapVoice as consideration for the electronic dissemination of the company’s information and our comments about the company. Section 17(b) of the Securities Act of 1933 requires that SmallCapVoice fully disclose the type consideration (i.e. cash, unrestricted stock, restricted stock, and restricted stock with registration rights, stock options, stock warrants, or other type consideration) and the specific amount of the consideration our company receives or will receive, directly or indirectly, from an issuer, underwriter, or dealer. "
"Fascinating" IMO, you can even "pay um" in stock shares, or "warrants" or "restricted stock", etc. Would like to find out/see how BHRT made "payment" to these guys? Will have to look for their "disclosure", which that statement above, says is "mandatory"? Extremely interesting IMO, to say the least.
Wait, just found it, it's on the "SmallCapVoice" page "disclaimers":
"BHRT: Small Cap Voice received $5,000 from the company on 5-27-14 for 30 days of service."
$5000.00 for "30 days of service". Wow, IMO again. Wonder if it was "cash" or "stock" or whatever?
BHRT has used "paid penny promotion" in the past. There's several web sites that list it, who did the "promotion", now much was paid and many "comments" on some web sites of people testifying they received the "promotions emails" and the disclosure at the bottom, saying it was "paid promotion". So, I guess it's not "new" for this company.
In previous "PR", didn't BHRT say it had "hired" and "retained" the services of some "PR/marketing Firm" to handle their "investor relations" and marketing, "branding" etc?? What happened to them? Sept. 30th, 2013 "Outside Eyes" touted as their "new service provider" to handle "marketing plan and investor relations efforts. " which IMO, totally overlaps with what this "SmallCapVoice" lists as their "services"? In all the recent BHRT "PR", I've never seen "Outside Eyes" ever listed on any "PR" as the "contact" person/firm? All "PR" normally lists the "contact/PR firm" at the bottom of the press release. For example, a Nov. 4th or Dec 2nd, 2013 "PR" from BHRT, listed "Wragg & Casas Public Relations " of Miami , FL as the "contact"? This "PR" today, now lists "SmallCapVoice" as the "contact firm"? Whatever happened to ole "Outside Eyes" being their "service provider"? "Wrag & Casas" list their "Services" as:
"Wragg & Casas Public Relations is Florida’s leading independent public relations firm.
A full service firm, we create and execute strategic public relations, communications and marketing programs that support clients’ objectives and communicate their messages effectively."
Isn't that what "Outside Eyes" was supposed to do, as stated in a BHRT "PR" release? It's confusing IMO?
So, that's like qty-3 "firms" now all doing some sort of "investor relations" and "PR" and "promotion" or "marketing" or whatever you want to call it? I can't follow it? Confusing, IMO?
http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/bioheart-adds-two-service-providers-to-its-team-of-resources-otcqb-bhrt-1835904.htm
This "SmallCapVoice", IMO, lists themselves as some sort of "one stop shop" for handling all your "penny PR and promotion needs"? (promotion and "marketing" are synonymous IMO)
And " Broadcasts will also be available to our database, made up of a growing list of shareholders from all of the companies that we represent, plus other interested persons." (sounds like good ole "email list" penny "promotion" to me?) In the past, these were done with physical "mailing lists" traditionally and penny "newsletters".
It's a long wash list of "PR and promotion services" listed on their "services" page?
http://www.smallcapvoice.com/Investor-Relation-Services.html
Interesting, "SmallCapVoice" also list "financing" for penny stocks as one of their "services"? "40% to 60% Loans on 144 stock ", for example. Who/what, public traded company would do "financing" , with a "firm" who doesn't list a physical address right under "contact", on their public web page? Now that is super "interesting" IMO. A "144" type financing, with 40% to 60% "loan", per my understanding, would fall under a REG "D" type "private placement" of some sort, or "ASHER" type deals, possibly? As "ASHER" firm/deals are un-registered, "private placements" essentially, per my understanding. A 144, I think, is some sort of "loan", but the company puts up shares of stock (discounted I believe), and if the share price drops below a certain percent, then they don't pay it back, but the shares are given to the lender? Something like that?
Now they're down to using penny stock, PAID PROMOTION email/phone type firms? Doesn't impress me in the slightest IMO. Penny promotion, PAID PROMOTION is not a "good thing" IMO. "Penny promotion" firms, "email lists", etc being "utilized" are a sign of desperation to me, IMO. It's just "penny-ville" to the hilt, IMO. I mean, does the "world leader" in "stem cell" blah, blah, blah, really need to use "paid penny promotion" web sites and "firms", etc? Really? (BHRT own corporate web site states, "We are committed to expanding our role as the world’s leader...")
The "SmallCapVoice" facebook page is littered with "promotions" using wording like the following:
"This Play is Ready to Rock Today"
"On our email list? Be sure to check your inbox tomorrow for our next big MJ pick!"
"Tomorrow's Big Play Tonight" (sounds like "Vegas" IMO?)
"XYZ up today. Listen to the Interview Here!"
"Former Porn Star Alia Janine On Today's Berman Show Pot-Cast Brought To You By Verde Media Group Inc."
"Vitamin Blue Launches Hemp Apparel Line"
It's littered with "marijuana stock" promotions.
It doesn't get more PENNY-ville than that, IMHO. So, this is where BHRT wants to "promote" itself? These are the "companies" it wants to be "promoted" with? WOW, IMO.
At least on their facebook page, this "SmallCapVoice", actually listed an actual "physical address" as "Cedar Park, TX" (it's an area a short drive down the road from Austin, know the area well)
Under their "services", here is what "SmallCapVoice" lists:
"Contact via email and telephone Smallcapvoice.com’s list of portfolio managers, traders, brokers, and analysts on behalf of CLIENT." (sounds like good ole penny "promotion" indeed IMO)
It's 30 minutes into the trading day and about 3800 shares traded. That like 3800 X .024 = $92.00 BUCKS WORTH. One hour into the trading day and it made about 19K shares. 19K X .024 = $456.00 BUCKS WORTH. It just hit about $2K worth now, 2 hours into the trading day. It's totally "flat-lined" out so far today. Guess the "PR" hasn't hit the "email lists" yet, or their is "PR FATIGUE", IMO. Volume was way off all last week too- going under 1 million shares a day, except when selling off. It trades higher volume on the big sell-off days, then low volume in the periods in between, when I look at a "big chart".
" hypothetical assumptions."??
This will make it easy, to PROVE there are no "assumptions" being made.
Here is the BHRT "MS Study" ole "PR" that was linked prior, yesterday.
http://thrivemdvail.com/stem-cell-treatment-multiple-sclerosis/
Take the name of that physician and enter it here, on the PUBLIC, government of the State of Colorado provided, "CHECK A LICENSE" web site:
https://www.colorado.gov/dora/licensing/Lookup/LicenseLookup.aspx
The result, for that first name, last name of THEE PHYSICIAN in that BHRT, "MS PR" link, results in only ONE MEDICAL LICENSE/NAME being the result, in the entire state of Colorado. It lists the license location as "EDWARDS COLORADO", same as the "PR" release.
(the BHRT "MS PR Study" cited here, in this forum, lists "56 Edwards Village Blvd Unit 113,Edwards CO 81632", on the web page linked, as the location/practice where the "MS STUDY" is to take place)
The result of using the State of Colorado, PUBLIC, "medical check a license" page, lists a medical license, for thee EXACT NAME of the physician in the "MS PR" as being "active" and "with CONDITIONS". Click the blue colored, "DETAILS" button of the resulting medical license to open up the entire details listed.
It will show ALL "medical board actions" and lists specifically, the documents, PUBLIC DOCUMENTS, with links, that can be viewed, in PDF form: Document 298131 (the 12 page "Third Stipulation and Final Agency Order", 17459, 102115, and 8147. ALL PUBLIC and ALL VIEWABLE documents, from the Colorado Medical Licensing Review Board.
ALL THERE. No "assumption" or "hypotheticals", NONE. It's public info, and easily located and made available to the PUBLIC, for a reason, IMO.
"10 years ago"????
The documents, PUBLIC DOCUMENTS say his "medical license" just went under "probation" THIS MONTH (May 2014), for the next FIVE years, into the FUTURE, not the "past". The "effective date" for the "probation" of his med license began May 6th, 2014 and will last 5 yrs, and the language of the document says there is nothing to "remove" that 5 yr "probation", as he already got to the 3rd "stage" apparently, of not complying with the previous "actions" of the medical board dating back to 2006 or so, NOT 10 yrs ago.
NOWHERE does it say he "got wasted" or "smoked a bowl" as the reason for having his medical license put under "probation", which is about one step from having it "yanked", about as serious a medical "board action" that ANY physician can undergo. It's not about "smoking a bowl", not even close. There's nothing even slightly "trivial" about it, IMO. Nothing.
THAT is what that 12 page documents says. He will be "monitored" GOING FORWARD (not past, as in 10 yrs ago) for what they stated was the "safety and well being" of his patients, as he's not up to "standards", ACCORDING TO THE MEDICAL LICENSE REVIEW BOARD OF COLORADO to "safely" practice w/o "monitoring", on-going, "monitoring".
These are PUBLIC FACTS per the supreme, govt "regulatory board" regarding the oversight of "practicing medicine" in the State of Colorado.
The physician in the new "stem cell", "MS study PR" which says he's "about to start" an "MS study" in which "Bioheart BHRT is sponsoring it" (the PR was "linked to" earlier this AM), appears to have just recently signed a document (also signed by the Colorado Medical Board Inquiry "A" leadership and the Colorado Senior Assistant Attorney General, Attorney for the Colorado Medical Licensing Board), dated April 10th, 2014 (effective date May 6, 2014), in which there is a 5 yr "probation" placed on his medical license, via whats, apparently called a "3rd stipulation action", that appears to go back to around 2005/2006, in which the "doctor" did not comply with board sanctioned "actions" by the regulatory medical board of Colorado.
I'd suggest anyone interested in this "MS study" read the 12 page document, that is public information and was found, via a simple Google search.
You go to the Colorado regulatory site, choose, "department of regulatory" of the two "bubble choices to click"- it says "log in", you just hit "enter" and then enter the physician's name. There are about 4 documents/actions listed, the last one being the April, 2014, 12 page document of the "probation of license action" by the Colorado medical licensing board.
https://doraimage.state.co.us/LibertyIMS::/sid989dz9U5aYjzRGd9/Cmd%3D%24%2444F6ApAb_WkbD35Xs%3Bej3X%3D%23Aoh
"Interesting" stuff, to say the least, IMHO.
Here are just a few lines from the 12 page document (paraphrased/typed close to word for word), as it's a scanned PDF and you can't cut n paste from it:
item 9.
a) It says basically on bottom of page 2, under heading "FACTUAL BASIS":
Respondent practices medicine as an anesthesiologist (linked MS "PR" says same thing) and provides interventional pain management to patients. Respondent also owns a medical practice in which he offers various services intended to provide regenerative and restorative patient care:
b) Respondent has a physical or mental illness or condition that renders respondent unable to perform a medical service with reasonable skill and with safety to patients in the absence of treatment monitoriing; and (continues to next page, page 3)
c) Respondent has a history of habitually or excessively using or abusing alcohol, a habit-forming drug, or a controlled substance.
10. Respondent admits and the Panel finds that the conduct set forth above constitutes unprofessional conduct as defined in section.....
PAGE 3, item "12": "PROBATIONARY TERMS"
12. Respondent's license to practice medicine is hereby placed on probation for five years commencing on the effective date of this order.
PAGE 4 has several bold titled sections with extensive requirements- here are some of the "bolded" titles:
AUTHORIZED USE OF ADDICTIVE SUBSTANCES
TREATMENT MONITORING
(it goes on for several pages, explaining he will be "monitored" for a period of 5 yrs, until the "panel" deems him "safe" to to practice with "skill and safety to patients")
Those are just some "highlights". Guess those never make it into any "PR"?
" there are currently no plans, arrangements, commitments or understandings for the issuance of the additional shares of Common Stock which are proposed to be authorized."
That word, "currently" is VERY specific. The BOD, can meet the next day, vote in a "new plan" and per that same 14C, use those shares for pretty much ANYTHING THEY WANT, including "compensation" and "incentives", etc
14C filing, PAGE 51:
"Material Terms, Potential Risks and Principal Effects Of The Increase of Authorized Common Share
Our Board of Directors and the consenting majority stockholders have adopted and approved resolutions and an amendment to the Articles of Incorporation to effect an increase of the number of common shares of the Company that the Company may issue from nine hundred and fifty million (950,000,000) shares of common stock and twenty million (20,000,000) shares of preferred stock, both $.001 par value respectively, to two billion (2,000,000,000) shares of shares of common stock and twenty million (20,000,000) shares of preferred stock, both $.001 par value respectively. The Board of Directors and the consenting majority stockholder believes that the Increase in Authorized common shares is in the best interest of the Company and its stockholders because the increase in the number of authorized but unissued shares of Common Stock would enable the Company, without further stockholder approval, to issue shares from time to time as may be required for proper business purposes, such as providing for reserves that are often required when and if necessary to raise additional capital for ongoing operations, business and asset acquisitions, present and future employee benefit programs and other corporate purposes as we make every effort to become cash flow positive.
The increase in the authorized number of shares of Common Stock could have a number of effects on the Company's stockholders depending upon the exact nature and circumstances of any actual issuances of authorized but unissued shares. The increase could have an anti-takeover effect, in that additional shares could be issued (within the limits imposed by applicable law) in one or more transactions that could make a change in control or takeover of the Company more difficult. For example, additional shares could be issued by the Company so as to dilute the stock ownership or voting rights of persons seeking to obtain control of the Company, even if the persons seeking to obtain control of the Company offer an above-market premium that is favored by a majority of the independent shareholders. Similarly, the issuance of additional shares to certain persons allied with the Company's management could have the effect of making it more difficult to remove the Company's current management by diluting the stock ownership or voting rights of persons seeking to cause such removal. The Board is not aware of any attempt, or contemplated attempt, to acquire control of the Company, and this action is not being presented with the intent that it be utilized as a type of anti-takeover device.
Stockholders should recognize that, as a result of this proposal, they will own a fewer percentage of shares with respect to the total authorized shares of the Company, than they presently own, and will be diluted as a result of any issuances contemplated and potentially executed by the Company in the future."
14C filing, PAGE 6:
"SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Information Statement contains certain forward-looking statements regarding management’s plans and objectives for future operations including plans and objectives relating to our planned marketing efforts and future economic performance. The forward-looking statements and associated risks set forth in the registration statement include or relate to, among other things, acceptance of our proposed services and the products we expect to market, our ability to establish a customer base, managements’ ability to raise capital in the future, the retention of key employees and changes in the regulation of our industry. These statements may be found under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and “Description of Business,” as well as in the registration statement generally. Actual events or results may differ materially from those discussed in forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, including, without limitation, the risks outlined under “Risk Factors” and matters described in the registration statement generally. In light of these risks and uncertainties, there can be no assurance that the forward-looking statements contained in the registration statement will in fact occur.
The forward-looking statements herein are based on current expectations that involve a number of risks and uncertainties. Such forward-looking statements are based on assumptions described herein. The assumptions are based on judgments with respect to, among other things, future economic, competitive and market conditions, and future business decisions, all of which are difficult or impossible to predict accurately and many of which are beyond our control. Accordingly, although we believe that the assumptions underlying the forward-looking statements are reasonable, any such assumption could prove to be inaccurate and therefore there can be no assurance that the results contemplated in forward-looking statements will be realized. In addition, as disclosed elsewhere in the “Risk Factors” section of the registration statement, there are a number of other risks inherent in our business and operations which could cause our operating results to vary markedly and adversely from prior results or the results contemplated by the forward-looking statements. Management decisions, including budgeting, are subjective in many respects and periodic revisions must be made to reflect actual conditions and business developments, the impact of which may cause us to alter marketing, capital investment and other expenditures, which may also materially adversely affect our results of operations. In light of significant uncertainties inherent in the forward-looking information included in the registration statement, the inclusion of such information should not be regarded as a representation by us or any other person that our objectives or plans will be achieved.
Any statement in the registration statement that is not a statement of an historical fact constitutes a “forward-looking statement”. Further, when we use the words “may”, “expect”, “anticipate”, “plan”, “believe”, “seek”, “estimate”, “internal”, and similar words, we intend to identify statements and expressions that may be forward- looking statements. We believe it is important to communicate certain of our expectations to our investors. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance. They involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could cause our future results to differ materially from those expressed in any forward-looking statements. Many factors are beyond our ability to control or predict. You are accordingly cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements. Important factors that may cause our actual results to differ from such forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, the risks outlined under “Risk Factors” herein. The reader is cautioned that our company does not have a policy of updating or revising forward-looking statements and thus the reader should not assume that silence by management of our company over time means that actual events are bearing out as estimated in such forward-looking statements."
"Read the DEF14C". The ONLY thing that 14C says with certainty, is that more shares, new total of 2 BILLION to be exact, are being "authorized", that's it.
There is no other, concrete proof that "funding is in the works" or that some type of "major funding" will ever occur. It's impossible for anyone to know that, or that any "funding" will ever occur and the company's own 10-K/10-Q say just that, in numerous places/disclosures.
The stock price is at 2 cents. Realistically, the lower it goes the harder even "small" amounts of "funding" get, as evident via the horrible terms the company just used, as recent as Feb 2014, to bring in, amounts as low as $35K of cash.
Most recent 10-Q, PAGE 15:
"Daniel James Management
On February 19, 2014, the Company entered into a Securities Purchase Agreements with Daniel James Management (“Daniel”) for the sale of 8% convertible note in principal amount of $35,000 (the “Daniel Note”).
The Daniel Note bear interest at the rate of 8% per annum with all interest and principal due February 28, 2015. The Daniel Note is convertible into common stock, at holder’s option, at a 47% discount to the average of the three lowest closing bid prices of the common stock during the 10 trading day period prior to conversion. The Company has identified the embedded derivatives related to the Daniel Note. These embedded derivatives included certain conversion features and reset provision."
THAT is "funding" and it took a 47% discount on the shares, to get a "financing firm" to put up a whole, whopping, $35K in cash.
Even at 2 billion shares, who/what would "finance" any large amount of money to BHRT, IMO? Just the simple math shows how tough it would be. If that Daniel James firm just got a 47% discount on their share, for putting up $35K, then why would some "big" and "sophisticated" type investor put up a bunch of money, and expect lesser "terms" on their deal?
So, if shares, even a super tanker full were issued, how much could they raise, realistically IMO? Per those terms above, one would expect that the shares would have to be issued/given to someone at about 1 CENT perhaps (probably lower, for a large amount of money, IMO), to make them attractive enough to get an ROI on their investment, IMO.
So, how much would 1 BILLION shares at 1 cent bring in? 1 BILLION times 1 cent only = $10 million.
But WHO is going to barf up $10 million for a billion worth of penny shares, who? IF, they started to/needed to, start selling those shares to get their money back out of their investment- the selling pressure of 1 BILLION shares would crush the stock price IMO, and they'd never be able to sell/unload them- it would take yrs or selling, every day, at the average volume this stock trades at.
Just look at what happened to a few days of "selling pressure" from someone unloading a few days of 8 million shares being the highest vol selling day- the stock price collapsed 20% in a single day, or more in a couple of days, bring it rapidly below 2 cents again.
So, who would be willing to take that risk? The "ASHER" type firms protect their downside, via using the "floorless convertible", that way they CAN NOT LOSE, no matter how low the share price goes. WHY would someone else "step in", put up huge amounts of money, and not expect the same "down side" GUARANTEES?
I don't see it happening, IMO Even if they gave um a BILLION shares at say 1/2 cent, who would put up $5 MILLION, knowing if they tried to sell those shares, the stock price would collapse under the selling pressure? Secondaries are done for a reason, they're done when a stock has STRONG DEMAND and lots of buyers to absorb the shock/volume of the new shares entering the market. And even then, on enormously successful, highly traded, high volume/dollar vol stock, a large amount of new shares entering the market, almost always causes common share price depression, at least temporarily.
And who would take "debt", which is what "mezzanine" financing uses? BHRT has no positive cash flow, self cash generation to even pay their current debts and on-going expenses. WHO is going to step into some 2nd position as an debt holder? Of all the places/choices they could put, say several million dollars to "invest", they'd put it at risk here, on a 2 cent stock? Any money raised, wouldn't even allow them to pay their current debt off, so who would want to get in position behind that existing, unpaid debt? Again, makes no sense IMO. Even a BILLION shares being sold, wouldn't even, most likely generate enough cash to even cover the company's immediate debt and current cash deficits as stated in the numerous "going concern warning" details, IMO. The math doesn't add up.
Someone, IMO, is not going to pay 10 cents a share or something, to "invest", when the entire market cap is only about $11 MILLION and the common stock is hugging 2 cents, with recent lows of 1 cent and lower, and "ASHER" and similar being given their shares at 40% or greater discounts. Not seeing it happening or how/why it would happen IMO. Makes no sense that I can discern.
Another "study" with, what appears, to be another "doctor's office"? Wow. Not a university or similar "research department or team" or a group with formal "medical research/trials/publication" experience, but a "doctor" in their own practice/office?
But phase II/III trials of Myocell go nowhere and it's a 2 cent stock again?
And the "doctor's office" web site, IMO, touts many things as being "treated" using "stem cells"? Yet, the FDA clearly stated they have "approved" ONE "treatment" in the U.S. for "stem cell" anything, as far as I am aware? Per the FDA site, unless any "stem cell anything" is being done under an FDA, strict "research/study approved protocol", following strict, FDA oversight "research/study" rules and protocols, then it can't be "offered" on U.S. soil per my understanding of reading the FDA web site "warnings to consumers" and similar "updates" regarding "stem cells":
http://www.fda.gov/forconsumers/consumerupdates/ucm286155.htm
There is a huge difference IMO, between saying something is being "studied/researched", and using words/claims that it "treats/CURES" any particular malady.
This also looks like another PAID FOR BY THE PATIENT type "study", so what does BHRT "sponsoring" it, actually mean? (a google search revealed testimonial that this particular doctor did a stem cell "knee" procedure for a golfer, as $8,500 a knee. That would be cash, one would assume, as no insurance that I'm aware of would pt for an "experimental", non FDA approved "procedure" typically, IMO)
"This patient-funded study will track the improvement and delayed progression of MS symptoms. "
http://thrivemdvail.com/stem-cell-treatment-multiple-sclerosis/
It appears that the "practice" of "thrivemd" was only opened/started about 1.5 yrs ago:
http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/1112753769/leading-expert-opens-thrivemd-a-regenerative-medical-practice-in-edwards/
A "study" means it would, by historical standards, ONLY be about 10 yrs, maybe more to a U.S. based FDA approval- and what would BHRT ever fund that with? They can't even fund/advance the actual, FDA level phase II/III "trials" they "had", past tense, that stalled out and have now gone nowhere for going on about 5 years now.
So, while the phase II/III "Myocell", past, formal "trials" have not advanced in years now, they are doing "studies" or "something" related to a long "wash list" of maladies from now, "ED" to "eye" related stuff to "orthopedic" to now "MS" to "degenerative disc" to "COPD" to "animal" related illnesses, etc? Wow. It might not be long, before they have some kind of "study" to cover pretty much every serious malady known to man, perhaps? All with a staff of 4 full time, and one part time and almost no money and all while supposedly working on FDA phase II/III "trials" (plural/multiple) too, with one person as "Chief Science Office"? Wow, IMO.
I could have checked the calendar and said it was time for a PR about "something" any day now, IMO.
Of course, IMO, the "PR" is "vague". "ThriveMD is about to start a BioHeart-sponsored study". What does "about to start" mean? When? Why would it be hard to list thee date? And "BHRT sponsored"? What does that mean? They are paying money in some form? It already states it's "PATIENT FUNDED"? What exactly is BHRT's role as "sponsor" to a "study" mean or amount to? Details are not hard to provide IMO. I can go to clinicaltrials.gov, or read "PR", for example, from Baxter (just as an example) and everything "in detail" is specifically listed. Who, where, how long, expected outcomes, money involved usually (I'm not aware of them EVER charging a fee/cost to a "study/trial" participant, to the contrary, they typically compensate their study/trial participants that I am aware of), exact locations of each "study center", number of patients involved, etc.
Not impressed at all. Just more of the same old, IMO. A PR about a "study" at a place, when one reads the web site carefully, appears to be, basically, a single doctor's "practice" in a "suite" and a web site in which the use of "regenerative" and "restorative" and "stem cell therapy" and other words are used a lot, IMO. None of which are "generally accepted", FDA approved or peer reviewed or insurance or similar covered "procedures" that I am aware of, inside the U.S.?
A google search revealed no PUBMED or similar peer review or other "journal" publications in which this doctor's name appears to come up that I could find. It does reveal a lot of "PR" type material and "appearances" on things like a local radio show perhaps or a "blog" or "talk" to some "group" and things like "articles" in local "newspapers" or or similar "PR releases" being referenced that I found.
The name of the physician also appeared here, in the a Colorado.gov publication "The Newsletter of the Colorado Board of Medical Examiners ,Volume 15, Number 1 ,May 2007" under "medical board actions" section, for something in 2006. It appears to be the same physician as he lists himself as a "paint mgt" doc on his web site, and the address in the gov publication is "Greenwood Colorado". That's all I could find.
http://cdn.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobheadername1=Content-Disposition&blobheadername2=Content-Type&blobheadervalue1=inline%3B+filename%3D%222007+Physician+Newsletter.pdf%22&blobheadervalue2=application%2Fpdf&blobkey=id&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobwhere=1251832194839&ssbinary=true
The same physician appears to be listed her also under "board actions" (just public available info that popped right up on a simple google search)
http://www.mbc.ca.gov/publications/newsletters/action_report_2006_07.pdf
That first publication links here, to the Colorado medical board's web site- and the doctor's name comes up here, looks like 4 times it appears:
https://doraimage.state.co.us/LibertyIMS::/sid989dz9U5aYjzRGd9/Cmd%3D%24%2444F6ApAb_WkbD35Xs%3Bej3X%3D%23Aoh
That's all I could really find via using Google to look for details about publications, this "practice" called "Thrive.md", etc
Yep, totally agree. ANOTHER, "study". A "study" means ONLY about 10 years, and a remote, distant chance, by historical standards, to EVER reaching a salable "product/process/procedure" that would/could reach FDA "approval".
Just more, typical, BHRT "PR" IMO. They can't even fund/advance the actual, serious trials they "had/have", "stalled out" going on 4 plus years now.
But they have what, about a dozen "studies" now going on, all with a staff of 4 full time and one part time, almost no money, and a single, "Chief science officer"?
What does a another "study" amount to? IMO, not much.
"-Northstar being FORCED to take common shares instead of holding its 20million preferred and such BHRT no longer being in a Forbearance Agreement "??
How is an owner of preferred shares, "FORCED" to "take common shares"? How? They own the shares, outright. They've been given to them? Who can "take them" or "force them" to do anything with them?
Further, "Northstar" and several of the BHRT, most Sr. BOD members and largest share holders are ONE IN THE SAME? (Sam Ahn, being the single largest shareholder at this point, if I'm not mistaken?). They control Northstar AND BHRT. What/how or who is/are going to "force" them do something, or to "force themselves" to do anything, especially against their own interests?
The "forebearance agreement" was put in place, BY THE VERY SAME BOD MEMBERS, who are one in the same as "Northstar" as their "guarantee" that they forever stay in "first position" to get whatever is "paid back" on debt/loan obligations, as they put up personal collateral to guarantee that debt (when the B of A loan went into default)- meaning they have, more than likely, things like their own homes, or real estate or businesses, or cash accounts/CD's in banks or similar tied up as "collateral" Why would "they" undo their own security? How does that "work"?
Makes ZERO sense to me, IMO? Not getting the "theory" at all?
1) "As we recall BHRT signed with Cassel that specializes in securing large dollar investing for microcaps. "
BHRT, over many, many yrs, has "signed deals/agreements" with so called "experts" who "were" supposedly going to get them "financing". Here is just ONE example of many. There are lots of them going clear back to 2009/2010, and other than "dilutive share selling" used as "financing", none of them ever came true. IMO, "CASSEL" is nothing "new", and is more of the same old.
For example:
"SUNRISE, Fla., Jan. 30, 2012 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Bioheart (OTCBB:BHRT.OB - News), a leader in developing stem cell therapies to treat cardiovascular diseases, today announced that Frank Young will join Bioheart to be a financial consultant. Young will provide financial oversight of the company's capital fundraising efforts and cultivate relationships within the financial and health care communities to support Bioheart's business goals.
Young previously served as chief financial officer (CFO) with Bioheart from 2003 to 2005. He has more than 30 years' experience launching and managing venture-backed companies in the technology and health care industries.
"Frank's entrepreneurial spirit and successful fundraising strategies, combined with his previous accomplishments at Bioheart, make him an ideal fit for Bioheart," said Mike Tomas, Bioheart's president and CEO. "Frank has a proven track record launching, managing and financially advising numerous companies across the healthcare industry."
Previously Young worked as CFO with CURNA,a health care company known for its discovery of new therapeutic compounds. He engineered the sale of the company in fewer than two years for more than five times the invested capital. He also worked as CFO with Mitral Solutions and Hyperion. As CFO with Bioheart, Young assisted in raising more than $9.5 million from investors in addition to negotiating international manufacturing arrangements and joint ventures. "
http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2012/01/30/466536/244075/en/Frank-Young-Joins-Bioheart-as-Financial-Consultant.html
Whatever happened to "Frank Young"?
NEVER amounted to any "financing" deals, other than dilution using firms like ASHER and similar. It was a great sounding "PR", and there's many just like it, all referring to a "team" or "experts" being "brought in/on board" for supposed "financing"
2) "-In January ASHER came in and paid the over head for the next 8 months of the bills for BHRT with an $860,000 advance taking back "
When? When did ASHER put up $860K in Jan to "pay the next 8 months worth of bills" with an "advance taking back"? I don't even know what an "advance taking back" is or means??
a) $860K is not even close to BHRT's 8 month "burn rate"- they spend a whole lot more than that on just monthly "expenses". Their monthly SG&A "expense line" for just Q-1, 2014 was $838,329.(Latest 10-Q, PAGE 5, expense line entry, balance sheet/statement of operations). That's a cash use/burn rate of $838,329/ 3 = $279K a MONTH. JUST SG&A. Not interest on their debt, not R&D, etc, JUST SG&A. That alone would be 8 months X $279K = $2.2 MILLION needed.
b) The only money that ASHER put up in Jan, or yr 2014, according to the 10-Q is the following:
Latest 10-Q, PAGE: 14
"Asher Notes (During this year)
During the three months ended March 31, 2014, the Company entered into a Securities Purchase Agreements with Asher Enterprises, Inc. (“Asher”) or affiliates, for the sale of 8% convertible notes in aggregate principal amount of $97,500 (the “Asher Notes”)."
That is IT for "ASHER" in yr 2014. They never put up any $800K "to pay the bills for x number of months". They did ONE, "financing deal" in 2014 it appears (as of the release of the 10-Q, the one deal we know of to date), and did it for $97,500.
c) As recent as Feb, 2014, BHRT did another "toxic financing" deal w/ a firm named Daniel James Mgt for $35K, so obviously, IMO, their "bills were not paid for 8 months"?? They were so low, desperate for CASH, they gave a 47% discount on the shares and for a lousy, $35K total cash. That was as late as FEB 2014? Their "bills are not paid for 8 months"?
Latest 10-Q, PAGE 15:
"Daniel James Management
On February 19, 2014, the Company entered into a Securities Purchase Agreements with Daniel James Management (“Daniel”) for the sale of 8% convertible note in principal amount of $35,000 (the “Daniel Note”).
The Daniel Note bear interest at the rate of 8% per annum with all interest and principal due February 28, 2015. The Daniel Note is convertible into common stock, at holder’s option, at a 47% discount to the average of the three lowest closing bid prices of the common stock during the 10 trading day period prior to conversion. The Company has identified the embedded derivatives related to the Daniel Note. These embedded derivatives included certain conversion features and reset provision."
The firms that "short" BHRT are not "retail", they are the very firms that do the convertible share financing with them/for them, and there is nothing "illegal" about it. It's "routine" for firms like "ASHER" to take up short positions in stocks for which they hold "convertible" shares.
Here's an entire I-HUB created page, that explains in great detail what ASHER does, how they do it, and why they are typically the demise of any company that uses them for "toxic/death spiral" type of survival financing.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/~-ASHER-~-25451/
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=68247638
Short covering from last week? Wow, that volume just blew up right there. Buying or selling is the question?
Might be some short covering from the past week, IMO. I think one of the "big boys" is at play here and last week of course. They unloaded a big position or did some shorting IMO. Not sure which yet by watching the action, price movements?
Last week's biggest down day was on about 8 million shares, then a few lower vol days bumped it back up, then closed out down harder on the week on some 3-4 million selling. This just did 3 million shares in a blink, but it only moved it 8% on "the spread", no real upward price pressure? Strange IMO.
There's the WIDE OPEN SPREAD. They just bumped it "up" about 8% on less than $500 in volume traded.
It sat for just over 45 minutes or so w/o a single trade. Then the spread is opened up huge.
Every time I see it like this in the past, it's typically setting up for a big, down-leg IMO. Volume is real thin, spread getting huge, as in 8% to fill a single, tiny order.
"flat lining" again. It's been just "sitting" for over 45 minutes, going on 1 hour now, not a single trade crossed the tape.
Typically not a good sign, IMO, from observing whenever it's done this in the past. Volume is dried up on lower highs and lower lows. One sell order of "size" when it's like this, usually causes those very large, single day/moment, rapid drops seen last week.
"Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property
We hold limited patent and other intellectual property rights, and our success will be dependent in large part on safeguarding our existing intellectual property rights and obtaining patent and other proprietary protection for our product candidates.
We hold limited patent rights in our product candidates. Our MyoCath product candidate is protected by a patent, expiring in September 2017, in which we have an irrevocable co-exclusive license. Our MyoCell product candidate is no longer protected by patents, which means that competitors will be free to sell products that incorporate the same or similar technologies that are used in MyoCell without infringing our patent rights. As a result, MyoCell, if approved for use, may be vulnerable to competition in the form of products that use the same or similar technologies. We have previously licensed certain patents and patent applications relating to our MyoCell product candidate. These licenses have all lapsed as of the date of this report, although we have had discussions with the relevant licensor regarding a potential reinstatement of our rights in such licenses.
Our commercial success will depend to a significant degree on our ability to:
·
compel the owners of the patents licensed to us to defend and enforce such patents, to the extent such patents may be applicable to our products and material to their commercialization;
·
obtain new patent and other proprietary protection for MyoCell and our other product candidates;
·
obtain and/or maintain appropriate licenses to patents, patent applications or other proprietary rights held by others with respect to our technology, both in the United States and other countries;
·
preserve intellectual property rights relating to our product candidates; and
·
operate without infringing the patents and proprietary rights of third parties.
Failure to obtain adequate patent protection for our product candidates, or the failure to protect our existing patent rights, may impair our ability to be competitive. The availability of infringing products in markets where we have patent protection, or the availability of competing products in markets where we do not have adequate patent protection, could erode the market for our product candidates, negatively impact the prices we can charge for our product candidates, and harm our reputation if infringing or competing products are manufactured to inferior standards.
Our most important license agreement with respect to MyoCath is co-exclusive and the co-licensor of the intellectual property, a division of Abbott Laboratories, may also seek to commercialize MyoCath.
In June 2003, we assigned our exclusive license to the primary patent protecting MyoCath to ACS, originally a subsidiary of Guidant Corporation and now d/b/a Abbott Vascular, a division of Abbott Laboratories. In connection with this agreement, ACS granted to us a co-exclusive, irrevocable, fully paid-up license to this patent for the life of the patent. Because our license is co-exclusive with ACS, ACS may, parallel to our efforts, seek to commercialize MyoCath if MyoCath secures regulatory approval."
Most recently filed, BHRT, 10-K report, yr ended 2013, PAGE 40.
BHRT is in potential co-competion with ABBOTT labs for Myocath, and their patent expires in 2017, only about 3 yrs away. Their "flagship product", "Myocell", their only product to ever reach significant progress, IMO, via phase II or III level, FDA type trials (those trials have been stalled, gone nowhere since about 2009/2010) is no longer under patent protection.
ABBOTT market cap $59 BILLION on NYSE. ABBOTT share price is about $40 per share, 1.5 BILLION shares outstanding (less shares than BHRT has now authorized to be available at 2 BILLION shares on a 2 cent stock), ABBOTT has $3.2 BILLION in operating cash flow and net income of about $2 BILLION on sales (revenues) of about $22 BILLION a yr.
"There is no patent concern here at all IMO. This is ridiculous to keep bringing it up."?
Well, SENIOR MGT didn't, apparently think it "ridiculous", to "keep bringing it up"? They just dedicated an entire section of the most recent (end yr 2013), SEC filed, 10-K to "bringing it up"? Why?
Most recent filed 10-K, PAGE 40 (just ONE example of an entire "section" of the document dedicated to "risk related to PATENTS", but there is much more as the word "patent(s) appears about 140 times in said document)
Latest 10-K, PAGE 40:
"Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property
We hold limited patent and other intellectual property rights, and our success will be dependent in large part on safeguarding our existing intellectual property rights and obtaining patent and other proprietary protection for our product candidates.
We hold limited patent rights in our product candidates. Our MyoCath product candidate is protected by a patent, expiring in September 2017, in which we have an irrevocable co-exclusive license. Our MyoCell product candidate is no longer protected by patents, which means that competitors will be free to sell products that incorporate the same or similar technologies that are used in MyoCell without infringing our patent rights. As a result, MyoCell, if approved for use, may be vulnerable to competition in the form of products that use the same or similar technologies. We have previously licensed certain patents and patent applications relating to our MyoCell product candidate. These licenses have all lapsed as of the date of this report, although we have had discussions with the relevant licensor regarding a potential reinstatement of our rights in such licenses.
Our commercial success will depend to a significant degree on our ability to:
·
compel the owners of the patents licensed to us to defend and enforce such patents, to the extent such patents may be applicable to our products and material to their commercialization;
·
obtain new patent and other proprietary protection for MyoCell and our other product candidates;
·
obtain and/or maintain appropriate licenses to patents, patent applications or other proprietary rights held by others with respect to our technology, both in the United States and other countries;
·
preserve intellectual property rights relating to our product candidates; and
·
operate without infringing the patents and proprietary rights of third parties.
Failure to obtain adequate patent protection for our product candidates, or the failure to protect our existing patent rights, may impair our ability to be competitive. The availability of infringing products in markets where we have patent protection, or the availability of competing products in markets where we do not have adequate patent protection, could erode the market for our product candidates, negatively impact the prices we can charge for our product candidates, and harm our reputation if infringing or competing products are manufactured to inferior standards."
That's the Sr. Mgt in their own words, and a LOT of "talk" discussing the importance of "patents" and how they can adversely impact their "chances" at potential business success, present or future.
I personally have to go with the words of Sr. Mgt and their duly filed, legally binding SEC documents, as I, IMO believe they are in the best position to know and understand what they put in those SEC filings. They put every word in their for a reason.
"BHRT is on track to be first to market with a heart stem cell solution if approved by the FDA."?? How?
BHRT's main, furthest advanced phase II/III trials have gone nowhere in over about 4 yrs now. Nothing has "advanced" making them "on track" for anything IMO? MIRROR, the word/trial, did not even appear in the last 10-Q filing, not a single time. At last update, approx, one yr ago, it had "ONE patient enrolled". A typical time period for a phase III trial like that, to even reach "completion", let alone preparation to "submit" to the FDA, let alone the time for the FDA to "review/consider" it for "approval", let alone that they would successfully "approve" it, would be year(s), as in several yrs MINIMUM, per any generally accepted, industry "norms", IMO and all of the published, similar "trials" I'm familiar with ever reading about.
For example, here is a phase III, "stem cell", "heart" type trial being conducted by a cash/staff rich company, Baxter healthcare. (approx. 60 THOUSAND employees at their disposal, $BILLIONS to spend if needed). They list the following:
Enrollment: 291
Study Start Date: April 2012
Estimated Study Completion Date: June 2016
Estimated Primary Completion Date: June 2016 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)
They are listing about FOUR YEARS until they "estimate" even "final data/completion". That's a company with some of the finest, most successful, most experienced FDA regulatory "trial" people and submission experienced people on this planet at their disposal, IMO. And they need FOUR YEARS according to their clinicaltrials.gov filing. They have entire "departments" to handle these trials and the FDA regulatory work, probably 1000's of people total, with budgets in the $100's of MILLIONS of dollars, purely dedicated to "trials" and "FDA submissions".
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01508910?term=baxter+stem&rank=9
In that same time period (from mid 2009/2010), BHRT declined from about a .60 to .70 cent stock (spike to $1 or so) to now essentially a 2 cent stock. They had about 42 million shares outstanding then, and today it's about 500 MILLION shares outstanding, despite those phase II/III trials going essentially nowhere (see their own 10-K/10-Q for last "updates" regarding the MARVEL or REGEN trials as examples).
In that same, approx. time period, they've are now on their 3rd CEO, they've had mass layoffs/departure of staff, mass departures at the Sr. mgt and BOD levels, and have been down to about 3 full time, most recently now 4 full time and one part time "employees". Many who left/laid off/departed or whatever, were their people who had FDA regulatory submission and FDA "trial" experience, according to past company filings, PR and similar.
There is not a single indication IMO, that they are even remotely close to being ready to complete (as in yrs away) a single, phase III trial, let alone have the financial resources or staff resources to do it, let alone prepare and submit it to the FDA to even be considered for approval. I see no proof of that happening anytime in the near future (even distant future IMO).
The entire market cap of the company as of Friday, sits at about $9.4 million dollars, and they are heavily debt laden. Most of any cash they raise or spend (or common stock shares they pay out as "payments"), goes to IMO, from reading their 10-K/10-Q filings 1) SG&A expenses (salaries and "other" stuff) and 2) Interest on their debt and 3) Payments to "others" like Northstar for example, per their own SEC filings. They have little to no cash on any given month to month basis (maybe $100K to $200K per month max, at most, usually less, per past 10-K/10-Q filings). They are typically so low on "cash", that they use common shares of stock to "pay bills", as in handing out 10's of MILLIONS of shares of stock per the last 10-Q. (see last 10-Q filing, PAGES 23/24 as examples)
They spent a GRAND TOTAL of about $10K on R&D for the entire Q-1 period, 2014 (most recent 10-Q, PAGE 5, $9,857 entry). That would be about $3K a MONTH for "trials". It's IMPOSSIBLE IMO, to complete any type of FDA type "trial", let alone prepare the enormous paperwork and submission documents necessary, using $3K a month in spending, and having a staff of only 4 full time and 1 part time "employees", several who have zero FDA regulatory experience, and have never successfully navigated a single product/process to any FDA approval in the past, per their own resumes, as posted in company documents.
"Patent or no patent they have potential to be first to a billion dollar market. "
According to the Sr. Mgt's own warnings and statements in their own SEC filed documents, they are "at risk" in many ways to even continuing to exist as a company, or have a FDA approved product to ever sell: from lacking patents, to serious "adverse effects" in the trials to date, to lacking staff and money, to being a "going concern/liquidity" risk, etc from that "potential" happening, IMO and apparently their opinion also. It's a million mile stretch IMO, to go from a market cap of $9.4 million, a 2 cent share price w/ 500 million shares out, and a lot of debt, to just suddenly being a "BILLION dollar market". Who's BILLION dollar market? How? Where? Selling what product(s)? It's not even known IMO, that there is even a $BILLION market out there? Let alone, BHRT being "first" to it?
Don't see the connection whatsoever IMO.