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.
"With cold hard stock options,"? I've never, ever known a consultant who would work "pro bono" for no cash, base pay rate and take "options" (which may, or may not end up worthless), especially on a 3 cent, sub 3 cent stock.
No way, not in my opinion. I've been inside companies who's stock was so hot- it was nearly as good as gold at the time and consultants, consulting "firms" only want cash/contracted rates. Period. And that "golden stock", as in "options" ended up underwater, worthless for most who ever received them, when the stock market took a dive. Look at the history of BHRT "options" going back as far as you want- they'd have nearly all, if not all, expired 100% worthless, as the stock has been a straight down, nose dive from the IPO date, to today.
"Options" don't = money or a certain payment. Options are a gamble on some future event. Even if you grant them "in the money", as of today, if the stock falls tomorrow- they're not worth the paper they're printed on.
No consultant/consulting firm I've ever known would take "options" as up front payment for any work to be performed. They have a going rate you pay for their expertise, they're "hired guns" in every classic sense of the word. They demand top dollar compared to their peers- and they get it, because they deliver results. And hiring um takes money, cash money in my experience and my opinion.
BHRT is "cash poor" - by their own SEC filings. It appears even the few, key employees left may already be foregoing taking salaries- due to lack of cash to pay them, as the 10-K indicates they are owed "loan" or "back payments" (paraphrasing- I can site exact 10-K page number). So if there is not even adequate cash flow to pay them- then what are high dollar consultants going to get paid with?
That's my opinion and the way I see it. Three people total- for a high technology bio-tech biz conducting FDA level phase II/III level trials and supposedly "international" biz dealings and more? My local, very small size Starbucks or my dry cleaner has more than 3 employees, as does my dentist office or the local auto repair place or my local pizza joint/chain- and they are considered micro-micro size businesses, not public stock traded companies. Come on, get real IMO.
" let us know in the upcoming blog."
My opinion- if it's not in the SEC filed 10-Q/10-K or similar SEC document- it doesn't matter to me what it says. That's my opinion.
Look at the PR about "adding to the team" and then a few months later - the reality in the 10-K, is it's down from 5 to now 3.
As to outsourcing- you still need a sizable "core" group who still work for the company- in every instance I've ever been involved with. Consultants and similar need to be managed, as do projects, etc in order to be in compliance with the way the company wants business done, done to the company's core standards and internal policies, etc. The more you outsource- the more time you need for project mgt, meetings, oversite, etc. "Outsourcing" isn't some magic word, panacea "fix all" that just runs on auto-pilot; not by a long shot IMO and experience. Some of the worst projects ever boned up, were done so at the hands of "consultants"- they are legendary in industry.
One employee is the CEO- he is also acting as the chief financial officer among other things/duties per the way he signs off on the SEC docs. 2n'd is Comella CSO who is what, doing "webinars" and "talks" and "conferences" and what- actually running/managing FDA level trials AND overseeing R&D as the CSO all at the same time? Really? In the end- the "employees" are 100% responsible for compliance, regulatory, signing off on everything, etc- you can't pass off/pawn those responsibilities off via simply stating, "we used consultants, it's their fault". Doesn't work that way. You still need a "core" company behind the "outsourcing".
Further, as stated- what are they paying these "consultants" with? Seen the cash realities? I don't think consultants work for penny stock shares, like some of the other "deals" that have been done per the 10-K and similar documents. Most I've ever known want cash, and cash being paid on time. That's my opinion.
"You the ability to utilize others strengths in many areas with considerable less cost."
Paid for with what? Take a look at the financials and cash balance at any given time. "consultants", especially "experts" in bio-med, regulatory and similar fileds don't come cheap- not by a long shot.
Down to THREE "employees"? Was just checking latest 10-K, for period ended Dec 31st, 2013 and wow, hadn't even noticed. What happened - did they lay off some of the "team"?
Latest 10-K, PAGE F-17:
"Reliance on Key Personnel and Consultants
The Company has three full-time employees and no part-time employees. The Company is heavily dependent on the continued active participation of its two current executive officers, one employee and key consultants. The loss of any of the senior management or key consultants could significantly and negatively impact the business until adequate replacements can be identified and put in place."
THREE people as actual "company employees" and, as a company they're doing a phase FDA level II/III trial, a phase I trial in Mexico, they have webinars and conferences and "talks" going on and PR about "deals" all the way from Mexico, to South and Central America to as far as the Middle East, and multiple new "studies" being started (see recent PR) and more potential new "trials/studies" being started, in a wide range of differing fields, not just "the heart" anymore, and it appears (see recent PR's) even more "stuff"- all with THREE PEOPLE who are actual "employees"? Wow. That, is truly amazing IMHO. They don't appear to have much cash at any given time per their financial statements- so don't know how many "consultants" they could really "hire" IMO? Don't know?
And what happened to the fairly recent PR, from just last yr, that several "key team" members had been hired? Where did all that go? That's weird IMO? Really- they were hired for a few months or something and let go?
It looked like on Sept 13th, 2013, that three "new key positions" were added (Sr. compliance officer, Finance and Operations Manager and a Administrative Manager)- sounds like "hired employees" to me, the way it was stated?
http://www.bioheartinc.com/assets/press/2TeamExpansion2013.pdf
So I guess they're not there anymore, about 6 months later? That again, kind weird in just my humble opinion?
The company 10-Q, SEC filing for Sept. 30th, 2013, PAGE 11 stated the following:
"The Company has 4 full-time employees and 1 part-time employee."
So they had 5 "employees" as of that date, but now this 10-K says down to 3? That doesn't sound to me (just my opinion) like an "expanding" and "rapidly growing" company, with "imminent" big sales, "growing revenues" and being "near cash flow positive" etc and similar claims being made in many statements, across multiple "talk boards" and talk outlets that I've read and read numerous times?
So, it sorta looks like IMO, they've been "down sizing" a bit? Those PR about the "team" getting bigger- didn't seem to last too long I guess perhaps? Just my opinion- but the 10-K's say they've reduced as far as I can tell?
Doesn't make any sense IMHO. Again, just my 2 cent opinions. I've never heard of a THREE person company doing "global" operations and FDA trial(s) as in multiple, and conducting "training seminars" and "webinars" and doing "deals" all over the place (again, see most recent 6 months of PR's,etc). That's just amazing IMHO. Seems hard to do- but who knows? I know companies with probably 50 to 200 employees, and annual sales of $100 million or more, and annual budgets in the $50 million or more range, and $10's, if not $100 million more in cash available- and I'm not sure they can handle all that/accomplish all that "stuff" as described in those PR's? THREE people, and almost no cash or money at any given time (last 10-K cash balance $200K total dollars approx. total), wow. That's pretty amazing IMO.
It's more than I can figure out I guess. Just my own due diligence. Do your own. Just my old 2 cent opinion of the way I see it. Buy, sell, hold, whatever based on your own research and good luck and good trading.
"Bioheart has recently applied to the FDA to begin trials"
So, realistically- that's what, about 5 yrs minimum, to maybe as long as 10 yrs to an FDA "approval" for a cash poor, near broke, 3 cent stock, company? Which of the 5 or so employees (see 10-K employee count) do you suppose will be "working" on this one- in addition to the dozen or so other "trials" and various other "undertakings" they've similarly announced? Of course- all while also doing "webinars" and running/managing/interacting with "centers of excellence" all over the planet it appears, to running at least one, if not more phase II/III, FDA level "trials" and more?
Which of the 5 will handle this new "FDA trial"? And it will be funded with what?
Just curious IMHO? Wondering?
No PR yet on 2 BILLION share new allocation, SEC form 14 recently filed?
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=9926197-843-289809&type=sect&TabIndex=2&companyid=734841&ppu=%252fdefault.aspx%253fcik%253d1388319
They just put out numerous PR on some "aging conference" or whatever it is, PR on a recent SEC form 8 filed- but just "skipped" the ole 2 BILLION share count, "material" kinda "event" I guess on the SEC form 14? That's sorta weird IMHO?
Still seems strange to me IMO? Is it like "selective PR" or something? Wonder what makes it into PR and what doesn't? They got that SEC form 8, the Beaumont hospital deal right out on a PR ASAP? Wonder why the SEC form 14, 2 BILLION share new allotment is lost apparently in the PR arena?
Very confusing IMHO? Not sure what happened to the PR release to all the common holders and public and anyone interested, so they can know BHRT is upping the available common share count to 2 BILLION, and the common holders don't even need to/have to vote a proxy, as the insiders all decided it's a done deal already- at least that's the way the SEC filing reads to me, IMO?
Still gonna be looking for the PR. I'd like to see one, IMO. Waiting I guess.
From SEC form:
"Board Approval of the Increase in Authorized Common Shares
On April 16, 2014, our board of directors authorized the increase of the authorized capital stock of the Company 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, effective as of the filing of an amendment to the Company's Articles of Incorporation with the Florida Secretary of State.
The Action by Written Consent
Through April 16 2014, the holders of a majority of the votes of the Company’s outstanding voting securities approved the increase of the authorized capital stock of the Company 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, effective as of the filing of an amendment to the Company's Articles of Incorporation with the Florida Secretary of State."
Same form:
WE ARE NOT ASKING YOU FOR A PROXY AND YOU ARE REQUESTED NOT
TO SEND US A PROXY.
"The increase in the authorized shares described in the accompanying Information Statement has been duly authorized and approved by the written consent of the holders of a majority of the voting capital shares of the Company’s issued and outstanding voting securities, your vote or consent is not requested or required. "
"The market is pricing this company based on the financials "? As nearly ALL companies are priced/valued- "earnings" being the number one determiner of price across the entire stock market, top line sales growth probably number 2, or customer acquired massive growth (eyeballs - like a Facebook for example- but numbers must be huge, as in staggering enormous and rapid, rapid, growth) then dividends paid out, then perhaps cash on hand- as in an R&D company but they must have yrs of "burn rate" cash on the books and little to no debt typically and extremely strong mgt with track records of past success, etc.
When did that ever change?
And "loans"? Companies with no cash flow, no sales, no revenues, no profits, no assets for the most part, etc are almost never, ever candidates for "loans"- unless someone else, something else is willing to put up what is known as "collateral" and/or security for said loan (a debt instrument).
That's my opinion for course- but backed by lots of stock market, well reported facts from credible source like CNBC or similar, academia statistics, etc from major agencies, funds, research companies etc.
This is just my opinion, but it should be required reading, every 10-K, cover to cover prior to posting on this board. I cannot imagine that anyone with an open mind and without an agenda could come to any other conclusion than this company is in dire financial condition! (auditors and going concern statements in multiple 10-K's back that opinion up, IMO)
Further, I don't think it's anyone's business to tell other free people what they should/should not be "required to view or watch" before being able to POST ON THIS BOARD. Who are you to decide that or set some standard for what me, or any other free person as to what we should be "required" to watch, else we have a supposed "agenda" or don't posses an "open mind"?
"pessimism"? Since when do financial realities, and business condition realities, and the reality of a dismal 3 cent stock price and high debt and massive common share dilution = "pessimism"? Once again, just inserting your own words into the statements/opinions of others. When were you (since you use the word ME and MY and I) appointed the arbiter of all that can, or can not, be said or discussed and then you decide what is optimism or "pessimism" as if you set the standards?
"webinar", does nothing for me personally, and that is just my opinion. There's 100,000's, if not millions of "webinars" on the web. So what? I don't know of a single, major corporation, that is enormously successful and profitable and thriving that was built on "webinars"? I could be wrong, but don't know of any I've ever heard of- and I'm pretty familiar, IMO, with the public markets and company's therein.
Downtrend appears solid now: 4 days broken under the 50 DMA. (50 DMA is now .036)
Two days it traded slightly up on lower vol, but still couldn't even touch the 50 DMA, let alone break back above.
And the other 2 days of the 4, have been down on higher volume, as in today, closing down almost 11%, and going as low as 18% or more during mid day trading.
The 200 DMA is at .019. Looks like that's the next floor- with nothing left in between IMO. It already touched as low as .025 on the highest vol day since breaking the 50 day. So, it looks down from here.
2 BILLION share news, IMO isn't gonna help anything, that's for sure. The last thing a sub 3 cent stock needs, one that's already highly diluted, is more dilution (as in a doubling of the outstanding shares) IMO. It also doesn't make it easier to swallow IMO, when they issue the proxy and essentially say, "We don't need your vote, as we've made sure insiders control it all- so the 2 billion is happening whether you common holders want it or not" (paraphrasing- but that's the jest of the announcement IMHO).
The proxy itself, actually says, "No need to vote- as it's controlled by the insider vote" so don't bother sending anything back or whatever. That's nice for the common holders IMO.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1388319/000114544314000493/d31298.htm
"This Information Statement is circulated to advise the shareholders of action already approved and taken without a meeting by written consent of the holders of a majority of the Company’s outstanding voting common and outstanding voting preferred stock, specifically, management and one non-solicited shareholder, representing 597,553,092 voting capital shares (including 20,000,000 preferred shares that have 25 for 1 voting rights or 500,000,000 voting shares) (62% of the Company’s issued and outstanding voting stock as of the Record Date)."
"The increase in the authorized shares described in the accompanying Information Statement has been duly authorized and approved by the written consent of the holders of a majority of the voting capital shares of the Company’s issued and outstanding voting securities, your vote or consent is not requested or required. "
That just makes a common shareholder feel great IMO. Your vote or consent is not needed or required. Oh well.
Any PR on this yet- I've still been checking and haven't seen it yet? Strange IMO? No "tweets" or facebook fan page updates? The SEC form 8-K, terminating the agreement with Beaumont hospital (as in discharging a debt owed) man, that one got blasted out on the ole "PR" channels, the stock boards, the ole "tweets" and what not, real fast.
Where is the PR on this form 14A filing? Wonder why it's not out their in a big, public PR "blast"? Just strange IMO? Some things go on big "PR" I guess, and other things/material type events, just don't it seems in my opinion? Kinda weird the way I see it? But that's just me and only my opinion.
One's gotta do their own due diligence. Good luck and good trading.
Thanks for the reminder of old PR from Sept. 30, 2013. (9/30/2013)
http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/bioheart-adds-two-service-providers-to-its-team-of-resources-otcqb-bhrt-1835904.htm
Lets see, "intellectual property" among other things is there area of specialty? Interesting? (Also, no mention of them however in most recent 10-K, searched every way possible I know, found no reference to them?)
And what else happened right around this date, as in apparent "litigation"?
Well, the Broward County clerk of the court site says the following was filed, stated as Filing Date: 10/28/2013
https://www.clerk-17th-flcourts.org/Clerkwebsite/BCCOC2/OdysseyPA/CaseSummary.aspx?CaseID=7155410&hidSearchType=party_case&DisplayCitation=no&CaseNumber=CACE13024037&SearchType=
And this appears to involve, among other things, potential "intellectual property" issues. Interesting IMO.
Puts those two "events" almost exactly one month apart. Interesting IMHO.
Good post of old PR. Thanks.
"There were some great buys today."?? Huh?
Check screen- it's BLEEDING RED, and DOWN 15% as of this moment. That's not "buys", not in any world of stocks I'm familiar with?
What ever became of all these past "PR" announcements about "funding" and "expert teams", to new CEOs and all? What did they ever amount to, IMHO? Years of PR just like that "Cassel" PR IMO.
10/15/2012
http://www.biospace.com/News/northstar-biotech-launches-20-million-private/275992
Or:
Aug 2, 2012
http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/bioheart-receives-2-million-term-sheet-investment-offer-from-vitalmex-global-leader-otcbb-bhrt-1686526.htm
Or:
Feb 29, 2012
http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2012/02/29/469402/247547/en/Bioheart-Appoints-Advisory-Board-of-Business-and-Financial-Executives.html
Or:
http://www.bizjournals.com/southflorida/stories/2007/03/05/daily23.html?jst=s_cn_hl
Or: even 2008, "big plans"
http://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2008/12/16/389897/156464/en/Bioheart-Inc-Announces-Plans-to-Divest-Non-Core-Products-to-Increase-Focus-On-Heart-Failure-Treatments.html?print=1
Or:
June 25th, 2010
http://www.bizjournals.com/southflorida/stories/2010/06/21/daily42.html?page=all
Or, the ole "strengthens the team PR"- how many of those have their been?
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Bioheart+Strengthens+Executive+Team+in+Order+to+Accelerate+Business...-a0206048389
Or, the ole "Middle East" , way back in 2010 (where have we heard "Middle East" before recently?) What did that ever amount too?
http://www.celltherapyfoundation.org/Blog/May-2010/Bioheart-Announces-Cell-Therapies-Program-in-the-M
Or, how bout a "WORLD" ole "summit" - you know those "talks" and meetings, this is 2009, what did that amount too?
http://www.finanznachrichten.de/nachrichten-2009-09/14919791-bioheart-inc-to-participate-in-the-2009-world-stem-cell-summit-on-september-23rd-008.htm
OR, more "key team members"- including one that promised "big sales numbers", Matt Fendrich and a big "finance guy" ole Alan P. Timmins. How did that "work out"? 2008.
http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2008/11/05/387740/153843/en/Bioheart-Adds-Key-Senior-Members-to-Its-Team-Vice-President-of-Sales-Marketing-and-Seasoned-Board-Member.html
Those are just a "few" of the ole "PR's", there's way, way, way more than that. "Centers of excellence" clear back in like 2010, South America and Mexico and all, clear back in like 2009/2010- same IMO, as PR in recent months. What does it ever amount too? That's my question? It's at sub 3 cents, cash poor, highly diluted now- and what did all these "teams of experts" and "summits" and "finance experts" and "advisory committees" and new CEO's, etc ever really amount to, especially as to where the common stock holder is concerned? What? That's a legit question IMO.
Three CEO's since what, 2009 (Leonhardt, Dr. Groth and now Tomas)- and the stock is at sub 3 cents, and the shares have massively diluted from maybe 20 million total, tops- to now about 460 million shares outstanding and now 2 BILLION authorized? So, does the "Cassel" ole "PR" get me too excited? No? There is literally, at least half a dozen just like it in 4 yrs or so IMO (I've read um all), I can link back to- that all say "lots of stuff", but all with those key words like "may" or "might happen" or "could lead to" etc, etc. That's my opinion and mine only.
So, the 14C mentions "Cassel" in it? Big whoop IMHO. Doesn't do it for me personally.
Do one's own due diligence and good luck.
"Expecting a decent week "? Expecting a total collapse back the 2 cent range, maybe as low as 1 penny.
That's what the 2, 2.5 yr chart is saying, especially given the outstanding share count being increased to a massive 2 BILLION shares on a sub 3 cent stock.
It's now down about 66% from .08 peak of March 6th. .08-.027 = .053/.08 = .66 X 100 = 66% down off peak.
Hardly "strong support" or "strong buying" IMHO?
All my opinions. Do one's own due diligence.
DOWN 18%, there's the reality of 2 BILLION share statement, IMO.
Dilution, on a penny stock, IMO will always crush the price further than it's already been crushed. It doesn't = some big "deals" or "partnerships" or whatever IMO.
It = share dumping to come. More selling, diluting to "finance" and pay key people, and give out 10's of millions of warrants (50 million warrants, "in the money" just recently), do more "floorless convertible" vulture/toxic "financing" and so forth.
That's all I see IMHO. I don't know what upping the outstanding shares to 2 BILLION on a 3 cents (well now sub 3 cent) stock would mean, in terms of "good news"? Just don't "see it"- no connection whatsoever IMHO? Only means more selling/dumping of shares to come IMO.
IF, it was a "great" or "good" thing- IMO, there'd be PR being blasted about it on every available outlet they could use. Instead a "proxy", SEC form is filed after close of market on Thursday before the markets are closed for 3 days. That's all. Nothing more happened IMO.
One cent, at least 2 cents (which 2 is not far off at all now at this pace) is the typical, real price where this "settles" normally IMO. Thus, I'd not be surprised in the slightest to see 2 cents, and even 1 cent as a strong possibility IMO.
Do one's own due diligence, buy, sell, hold as one sees fit. My opinions are my own, mine only.
Well, who ever is paying for this massive, coordinated pump campaign (interestingly IMO, leading right up to when they announce an increase to a staggering IMO, 2 BILLION shares on a sub 3 cent stock)- whoever's paying for it, I hope they didn't spend more than a cheap bowl of soup. Cause it's obviously not working IMO.
It broke the 50 DMA avg and in 4 trading days now, and has not even bounced once to even retest or even "touch" it- which says solid down trend is now in place. Also, volume is drying up despite this massive, coordinated IMO, pump and hype "plan" or whatever one wants to call it.
I've seen a lot of "stuff" over the years- but never anything like this. It's amazing to watch IMO. It's like the text book level "case study" of all the warnings and things spoken about regarding penny stocks, from the SEC and similar. All happening right here in real time- for all to watch and read and see. The pump and hype is fascinating how it came out of nowhere, like a "go" command was given and has not stopped yet. I know at some day in the future, it will vanish as fast as it came IMO, and these "names" will never be heard from again "touting" BHRT from market open to close (and then they go silent all night/weekend) and like automatons, "turn back on" again this AM on que- hitting over 50 comments not even 1, 1.5 hours into trading day.
This think used to only get maybe 20 "discussions" a day on avg. For 4 plus days now, it's 100 to 150 a day- from dude's using monikers like "bud" from the movie Wall Street. Laughable IMO.
Noooo, there's nothing "going on" here, no way? It's funny in a way to watch, very amusing, but also a lot of sucker/amateurs getting cleaned on a deal like this, IMO only. Really too bad. It takes away the credibility of the stock totally, again ONLY MY OPINION and MY THOUGHTS. Others can love it, like it, buy more, fall in love, think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread- but do their own due diligence please. Always do actual due diligence and don't rely on "bud fox" from a movie called Wall Street. I mean really? Come on.
2 billion share filing, new share's allocated, IMO will bury it back to the penny range. I don't see why, how, or why not? 4 yrs of dilution (read every 10-K going back that many yrs, shares were like maybe 20 million total, now are 460 million or more) and all it's ever equaled is a massively, near straight line down, declining share price and dilution of the common stock holder to near nothing. A 5 yrs chart tells all IMO.
That's my 2 cent OPINIONS only of course.
No PR on 2 BILLION new share count? I've been checking all news and other outlets?
It's being stated as a great thing that means an imminent partnership and also "big financing" (term used many times)- so where is the public, PR announcement? Why only filed, buried on some SEC document release on Thursday after market close and a long weekend?
They PR everything from every trivial "award" to a simple "talk" to some small group in Vail and similar- this 2 BILLION share count is big news IMO. Why hasn't the PR been put out yet? It's very confusing IMO?
I'm wondering why it's not on a big, public news announcement?
Just my own question and opinion- but it really has me wondering why they don't use PR and "tweets" and "blogs" and all on something as important as doubling the allocated, outstanding share count (950 million or so, to now 2 BILLION and the common holders have no vote or say in it?). Seems sorta important enought for a PR IMHO?
Wonder why it hasn't been released yet? Curious IMO?
"Strong buying on the ask, mm's can't keep this down much longer! "??
It's down about 11%, don't see any "strong buying on the ask"?? Where? It's selling off?
Also, there are no "mm's" (market makers) on an OTCBB stock. There are only broker/dealers who are subscribers/members of several electronic trading networks and can send "order flow" to said networks looking to match a buy/sell order. It's not a traditional "MM", "market maker" role as is found on a listed stock (NASDAQ/NYSE).
Shoot, you're 100% correct. I don't know what the heck I was reading- but I didn't see "MARVEL" pop out at me on the end of that title?
That's weird- need glasses maybe? Maybe I only read the "title" before clicking and fully opening it, then you see "MARVEL" as clear as day on the end of that top header. Yep.
You're correct. My confusion. So it's 170 total, 40 done, 130 needed to finish.
And as you stated- that .gov most likely just needs an "update" to match the 10-K, as they probably, almost for certain, as far as anyone is aware, aren't really expecting "final data" or whatever by Feb, 2014. Info is just out of date.
Clearer now. Thanks.
I guess that's probably it? Does the 170 number "jive" with what would be "Marvel part 2"? I don't remember- w/o going to 10-K and searching for it? Maybe it should be updated - cause some are going to see Feb. 2014, "final data" for a big number like 170 enrolled/patients and probably think something pretty big is cooking, IMO.
Also, it'd sure help IMO if they'd just put "Marvel" or whatever right on the .gov site. I noticed (and it's just a random sample, cause I happened to have read it), that Baxter for example put the trial "name" ( I think it's "RENEW" or something like that)right in the .gov site listing.
Thus, when there are all these "named" trials, across lots of dates/yrs, time periods- it's sure a lot easier to keep them sorted out.
You got the Apple trial, the Orange trial, the Peach trial, etc. Then when you see the "Autologous xyx, inhibitory, super duper, dna suppressant, cardiac blah, blah" in the header- you have no idea what that trial is often, but if you saw the "Orange" trial as a sub title, then one can say, bingo, I know that's the same on from 10-K page such and such, or that was the "Orange trial" that was in PR XYZ last month.
Just makes it easier IMO. Some companies use fruit names, or some other common object. BHRT looks like they use nice sounding names (nothing wrong with that- it's a way to make it easily remembered in PR and so forth) like "MARVEL" or "MIRROR" or "REGEN" (obviously a take-off of "regenerative" and that's all cool).
Would be easier to "sort" if those names are always attached to the trial's "formal title" which is usually long and very "medical terminology" based.
Just an opinion. No biggie.
Agree, it may appear MIRROR and MARVEL look "swapped" or confused. But the gest of the "question" being asked was, "What trial began in 2007" was "due for final data in Feb. 2014"?
Does anyone know which one that is/would be? Was Feb. 2014 known as an "expected date" for some "final data" for a 170 person trial? That's just a question, and kinda obvious IMO, as it would be pretty big news IMO?
And part II of the statement was simply, "Can anyone, other than an insider make any 100% for certain statement about MIRROR"? As it's been pretty "blacked out" as far as news/updates IMO. (notice MY OPINION)
That is all that was said/stated. The potential 'confusion" or appearance of "swapping" or mixing up of trial names in one line of use of Marvel versus Mirror duly noted.
Totally incorrect what?
All that was stated, is how can one possibly know with 100% certainty the status of MIRROR, other than "one patient enrolled", unless one has/had insider info? As "one patient enrolled" is all that has been stated in about 9 months. That is all that was stated. There have been claims made, that more can or is "certain" about MIRRROR and its status, and the simple question was raised, "How" would one know that with "100% certainty" outside of insider info as the trial is not on clinicaltrials.gov for instance and no public "updates" that I'm aware of have ever been given.
Two other trials in the 10-K are stated as needing to be "rinitiate" (which in English would mean they stopped and need to re-start).
But is was pointed out that on clinicaltrials.gov there is a trial, listed right now from BHRT, that says it was "began" around 2007 or something and that "final data/completion" was expected or is stated as "to occur" (guess that's how to understand the .gov site?) and thus it was stated, "what trial would that be"? as one is not aware of any public PR or similar saying to expect a trial to "complete/final data" in Feb of 2014? That was 2 months ago? So which trial is that? That is ALL that was stated and it was stated as an opinion or question as always. I didn't see the word "Marvel" appear anywhere (very well could have missed it) on that trial that apparently is "completed/final data" in Feb. 2014?
Thus, is that is what is being claimed? That Marvel has been "completed" and "final data" was due in Feb 2014? That trial info was updated pretty recently according to the .gov web site? Doesn't match with anything in the 10-K(s) I am aware of ? So, what 170 person trial recently got "final data"- THAT is all that was raised as a question. A question. Cause IMHO it's very confusing? What 170 trial is that, and where/when was it stated in a 10-K or PR or whatever that "final data" occurred 2 months ago? If one knows, then state it? That's all. A QUESTION.
If Marvel (again, don't see that actual word appearing on that .gov page) if Marvel in the 10-K, has not even been "reinitiated" and/or has been "on hold" is what the 10-K seems to say with clarity- then how can the .gov site, which states it was updated as of Jan, 2013 (after a 10-K that said same as this 10-K as far as I remember regarding either Marvel or Regen- aka they are "on hold)- then how was it "expected completion/final data" as of Feb 2014, 2 months ago?
THAT is all that was "asked" as a "question" and is clearly an opinion and/or personal question, clearly stated that the one who asked it, "is confused" or not clear which is which? MIRROR has "one enrolled" and don't know how one can claim to know anymore than that with 100% certainty? And which 170 person trial would have been "updated" fairly recently (Jan 2013) as expecting "final data" when no 10-K or PR or similar seemed to match that "expected date" that I am aware of?
That's it. That's all that was stated/asked and put out as a personal question or opinion- and was clearly stated as such.
2011 when that was done. It's 2014, almost mid 2014. Things can change a lot in that amount of time IMO. Not saying they have, but who can know w/o updates?
Who, other than insiders, as they don't seem to want to give out the update info as far as anyone can tell, IMO?
Updates seem like they'd be simple IMO? But, it's been stated on here, and I've seen it other places too- people have emailed, asked, re-asked, resent email, waited on the 10-K eagerly, etc and what does anyone know any different as of today?
Nothing new that I am aware of?
That's my opinion. If someone got an update that no one else knows about, share it for sure, cause a lot of people seem to want to know. Remember, the big "build up" to that most recent 10-K, was a strong sense it seemed, that the "update", any "update" would be in there. The amount of commentary after the 10-K, was in my opinion, "strong" with "wonder" or "disappointment" with wording such as "Where's the information on MIRROR?" (paraphrasing). Saw and read those type of responses many, many times myself.
Last I know, that anyone can know IMO, is July 2nd, 2013. About 9 months ago- and it was "one enrolled". That's it as far as I am aware of?
http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/bioheart-announces-phase-iii-mirror-trial-for-myocell-initiated-otcqb-bhrt-1807938.htm
So, who really knows at this point? Who? Just asking and my 2 cent opinion.
"The FDA didn't shut the trial down"?
Can that be said with 100% certainty, since BHRT specifically chose not to put it in clinicaltrials.gov?
That's one of the benefits of putting a trial on that site- it shows every update, every progress, etc. All anyone knows, that I am aware of, about "the trial" (MARVEL) is that it had "one patient enrolled" as of last "PR". How can anyone know anything else for certain w/o insider trading info? The 10-K didn't "update" it- it barely got a passing mention? (We are seeking to secure sufficient funds to reinitiate enrollment in the MARVEL and REGEN trials, Page 2, 10-K) (the word "reinitiate in my book, means it's now "stopped" and needs to restart- as in, did it ever "enroll" more than ONE? Who can know IMO, given that wording? just asking questions?)
So, can that statement be made with 100% certainty? I'm saying I sure don't know, and not sure how one can know- given there are literally, no "updates" published that I am aware of?
The clinicaltrials.gov still has Bioheart trial stuff on it that began in 2006 and 2007 and still don't show as completed or final data, etc. One says the "final data" for a 170 patient trial, started in 2007 was "due" in Feb, 2014? Well, it's April 2014, and don't see or hear of any "updates" on that one? Not even sure which trial that would even be? MARVEL?
Look at the date of that publication and the dates at which the trial(s) were at,at point of publication? The trial (phase II/III MARVEL, only 20 patient first phase was completed, part two 133 patients never progressed nor did REGEN ever progress, that was back to 2009/2010, see Bioheart web site "clinical trials" tab, and/or most recent 10-K) never progressed or moved forward much past that point of article publication it appears.
From linked publication: table near bottom:
Developer Country Status Indication Date Reference
Bioheart Inc North America Phase III Congestive heart failure 27-MAR-08
(2008 is the latest date given as of that publication- a lot happened after that, before the phase II/III was never resumed, even until today)
As of the date of that publication- they were still describing MARVEL "to be" a 330 patient trial to "take place".
Here is page 2, Bioheart, most recent 10-K:
"We have completed various clinical trials for MyoCell including the SEISMIC Trial, a 40-patient, randomized, multicenter, controlled, Phase II-a study conducted in Europe and the MYOHEART Trial, a 20-patient, multicenter, Phase I dose-escalation trial conducted in the United States. We were approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or the “FDA”, to proceed with a 330-patient, multicenter Phase II/III trial of MyoCell in North America and Europe, or the MARVEL Trial. We completed the MyoCell implantation procedure on the first patient in the MARVEL Trial on October 24, 2007. Thus far, 20 patients, including 6 control patients, have been treated. "
So, as is stated on the Bioheart web site, only 20, of a stated 330 patient "designed" study were ever "treated". It never went past that, that I am aware of from reading the documents?
(the Bioheart website updated that "part two" of MARVEL as being reduced I guess from the 330 cited in that publication, to now 133 total, but again, as of about 2009/10 nothing has ever progressed since that I am aware of, or does the Bioheart "trials" web site "tab" state differently nor does the most recent 10-K)
Thus, citing that linked article/publication is going way back IMO, way back- about 5 yrs or so I believe.
From most recent 10-K, PAGE 11:
"We initially commenced work on this study, called the Regen Trial, during the first quarter of 2010. The Company suspended activity on the trial in 2010 while seeking additional funding necessary to conduct the trial"
So, as far as I am aware, Q-1 of 2010 (or really 2009 for MARVEL), is essentially the last date/time period where any work related to the trial(s) cited in that article/publication ever took place or continued or progressed any further if I'm not mistaken or reading anything wrong? That is over 4 yrs ago now. The last MARVEL trial work ended in 2009 as far as I am aware of - and that, it appears, is what the linked article/published paper is referring to. So that is going back even farther- about 5 yrs or so ago. With no updates or further treatments beyond the 20 + 6 patients that again, I am aware of? (out of what was supposed to be 330 total, and that is what is stated in the article)
Thus, the article/publication is specifically stated as a "current opinion", meaning to me IMO, dated as of about 2009 (see date top of publication). That's going back a long time IMHO.
The exact words of that published article are, "MyoCell is undergoing phase II/III clinical development and has so far demonstrated safety and efficacy,"
"So far" is a very specific wording IMO.
That same article further states:
"Side effects and contraindications
In a pilot clinical trial into the feasibility and safety of MyoCell administration, one out of five patients was hospitalized 6 weeks after treatment because of progressive heart failure and asymptomatic ventricular tachycardia. However, no adverse events were observed in the other patients [853498]. In the other clinical trial of five patients, there were no serious adverse events, however, two patients experienced single episodes of non-sustained ventricular tachycardia [920357].
In one trial of six patients administered 210 ± 150 × 106 SkMs, there were three incidents of ventricular tachycardia in two patients. At 1-year follow-up none of these patients demonstrated repeat ventricular arrhythmia. In addition, three of the control patients experienced ventricular tachycardia during the follow-up period [952338].
During the MYOHEART trial, one out of five patients administered the highest dose died and six patients experienced arrhythmias of which four were thought to be related to the treatment. There was one case of arthralgia, one patient experienced dizziness and one patient suffered a pleural effusion [954669].
During the SEISMIC trial, six patients in the treatment arm experienced a total of 12 significant adverse events, including one death by multiple organ failure, one worsening of heart failure, one pericarditis, ventricular tachycardia in six patients (five of which were thought to be related to the treatment and all were resolved –all patients had experienced ventricular tachycardia prior to the investigation), one hematoma, one herpes zoster and one non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (this also occurred in one patient in the control arm) [954661]. The incidents of arrhythmias were the same in treatment and control groups [954682]."
So even as of that older date of that article, it's not like arrhythmias and/or tachycardia and yes, they used the "death" word, hadn't already been noted. It's right there in the article.
That's my take/read on the linked article. It's "old/dated" IMO and there is newer, more data that has occurred since its publication that I am aware of, including, as stated in the most recent BHRT 10-K that even "competitors" had trials suspended or chose to even stop trials, etc for various "adverse events", and that 10-K is written and published as of Dec 31st, 2013. Again, my 2 cent opinion. That article has a lot more info in it IMO, than simplifying it to a one liner, "safety and efficacy". It's a complex article and there is a whole lot more than that one statement being discussed in it IMO.
And, as stated, it's quite "dated" IMO. A more recent publication, position statement and opinion, in a peer reviewed or similar publication IMO would carry far more weight. 4 or 5 yrs, in high technology, high tech medical research/studies, etc- as things progress along and the pace of change is rapid, that many yrs is often practically "ancient history" IMO and from experience around high tech. Just look at the computer industry, 4 or 5 yrs is ancient technology. If you don't progress, develop, publish, update today, in that industry in about 6 month to 1 yr at the longest, development cycles- your goose is cooked and you will cease to exist typically. Things often move on timetables of months, or what happened last yr at the very latest, not 4 or 5 yrs ago IMO.
Further, BHRT has made a point to put those specific "warnings" or notice of "adverse events" (whatever term one wants to use) and they, BHRT specifically put them and included them in the 10-K, dated Dec, 31st, 2013. They must be in there for a reason IMO, else they would just strike them out, remove those statements or whatever. Management's opinion, must be that they need to remain in the 10-K and be clearly disclosed. Again, it's their words, and they say what they say. That's the way I look at it. What one makes of them, or how much weight to put on them, etc- that's one's own due diligence I guess IMO.
Make of it whatever one wants. The linked article is interesting, but dated IMO. My 2 cents, opinion of mine only.
I would "bet" there is no list.
WHERE is PR on 2 BILLION share allocation/ potential massive dilution increase, or "tweets",or facebook update,and blog, etc IF it's such a great thing as is being speculated? Why bury it on Edgar, on a typical SEC filing form w/o a single PR to link back to the big "announcement"?
I mean why? Really? They, IMO put out "PR" for the most trivial, and IMO often meaningless of things (awards, some "talk" or whatever), so if this massive increase in the allocated shares available, to 2 billion shares is "good" and "great" and means "imminent financing" and trials to advance and so forth- then where is that ole PR? Instead, the big "news" goes out after market close, heading into a 3 day weekend, on a standard SEC filing form (which most would never see unless checking EDGAR or similar) - why?
Why do it that way if it's such a great thing? I'm confused?
Again, they literally put out a "PR" about almost anything, no matter how trivial IMO, but this big "news" of 2 billion shares, which is being "claimed" means a multitude of "imminent" great things- but it gets no "PR"? Why? Why would that be?
Just my questions? I don't get it, not in the slightest. I'd think if it's as fantastic as is being claimed, it'd be on every PR and "tweet" and whatnot available? Correct?
What am I missing?
Regarding recent speculation of "big financing deals" being "imminent" and $BILLION dollar valuations: Here is what the company's own 10-K, SEC filed documents (very recent) say about their own financial condition and also about, in their own words, "potential problems in obtaining financing" (paraphrasing- see actual wording below taken from company's own 10-K filings):
Most recent 10-K, PAGE 52:
"Our Ability To Continue as a Going Concern
Our independent registered public accounting firm has issued its report dated March 24, 2014 in connection with the audit of our financial statements as of December 31, 2013 that included an explanatory paragraph describing the existence of conditions that raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. Our financial statements as of December 31, 2013 have been prepared under the assumption that we will continue as a going concern. If we are not able to continue as a going concern, it is likely that holders of our common stock will lose all of their investment. Our financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty."
Or, most recent 10-K, PAGE 26:
"evelopment and third party licenses, expanding and strengthening our intellectual property position through internal programs and third party licenses and recruiting management, research and clinical personnel. Consequently, it may be difficult to predict our future success or viability due to our lack of operating history. As of December 31, 2013, we have accumulated a deficit during our development stage of approximately $118.2 million. Our MyoCell product candidate has not received regulatory approval or generated any material revenues and is not expected to generate any material revenues until commercialization of MyoCell, if ever. Since inception, we have generated substantial net losses, including net losses of approximately $3.1 million, $4.0 million, $4.7 million, $5.2 million, and $4.4 million in 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively and substantial negative cash flows from operations. We anticipate that we will continue to incur significant and increasing net losses and negative cash flows from operations for the foreseeable future "
Or, most recent 10-K, PAGE 25:
"Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Need for Additional Financing
We will need to secure additional financing in 2014 in order to continue to finance our operations. If we are unable to secure additional financing on acceptable terms, or at all, we may be forced to curtail or cease our operations.
As of March 24, 2014, we had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $211,632.80 and a working capital deficit of approximately $13.4 million. As such, our existing cash resources are insufficient to finance even our immediate operations. Accordingly, we will need to secure additional sources of capital to develop our business and product candidates as planned. We are seeking substantial additional financing through public and/or private financing, which may include equity and/or debt financings, research grants and through other arrangements, including collaborative arrangements. As part of such efforts, we may seek loans from certain of our executive officers, directors and/or current shareholders. We may also seek to satisfy some of our obligations to the guarantors of our loan with Seaside National Bank & Trust, or the Guarantors, through the issuance of various forms of securities or debt on negotiated terms. However, financing and/or alternative arrangements with the Guarantors may not be available when we need it, or may not be available on acceptable terms.
If we are unable to secure additional financing in the near term, we may be forced to:
· curtail or abandon our existing business plan;
· reduce our headcount;
· default on our debt obligations;
· file for bankruptcy;
· seek to sell some or all of our assets; and/or
· cease our operations.
If we are forced to take any of these steps, any investment in our common stock may be worthless."
Or, most recent 10-K, PAGE 28/29:
" In addition, the Company executed a security agreement granting Northstar a lien on all patents, patent applications, trademarks, service marks, copyrights and intellectual property
rights of any nature, as well as the results of all clinical trials, know-how for preparing Myblasts, old and new clinical data, existing approved trials, all right and title to Myoblasts, clinical trial protocols and other property rights. In addition, the Company granted Northstar a perpetual license on products as described for resale, relicensing and commercialization outside the United States. In connection with the granted license, Northstar shall pay the Company a royalty of up to 8% on revenues generated.
In addition to the limitations imposed on our operational flexibility by the Northstar loan as described above, the Northstar loan, the Seaside National Bank loan, our obligations to the Guarantors, and any other indebtedness incurred by us could have significant additional negative consequences, including, without limitation:
·
requiring the dedication of a portion of our available cash to service our indebtedness, thereby reducing the amount of our cash available for other purposes, including funding our research and development programs and other capital expenditures;
·
increasing our vulnerability to general adverse economic and industry conditions;
·
limiting our ability to obtain additional financing;
·
limiting our ability to react to changes in technology or our business; and"
Or, previous 10-K, dated 3/29/13 PAGE 15:
"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 licenses certain patents and patent applications relating to our MyoCell product candidate. These licenses have all lapsed as of the date of this report, "
Or, most recent 10-K, PAGE F-2 (from the auditor's themselves)
"To the Board of Directors and
Stockholders of Bioheart, Inc.
13794 NW 4th Street, Suite 212,
Sunrise, Florida 33325
We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of Bioheart, Inc. (the “Company”) (a development stage company) as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, and the related statements of operations, stockholders’ deficit, and cash flows for each of the years then ended. The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audit included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Bioheart, Inc. (a development stage enterprise) as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the two years ended December 31, 2013.
The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements, the Company is in the development stage, and has incurred net losses of $118,180,983 since inception. In addition, as of December 31, 2013 the Company’s current liabilities exceed its current assets by $13,362,480. These conditions raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.
/s/ Fiondella, Milone and LaSaracina LLP
Glastonbury, Connecticut
March 24, 2014"
All my opinions only. Buy, sell or hold on your own choice. Do your own due diligence- like reading FACT BASED 10-K's and similar.
Regarding death/patient "adverse" events in trials:
Most recent 10-K, PAGE 31:
"Our product candidates may never be commercialized due to unacceptable side effects and increased mortality that may be associated with such product candidates.
Possible side effects of our product candidates may be serious and life-threatening. A number of participants in our clinical trials of MyoCell have experienced serious adverse events potentially attributable to MyoCell, including six patient deaths and 18 patients experiencing irregular heartbeats. A serious adverse event is generally an event that results in significant medical consequences, such as hospitalization, disability or death, and must be reported to the FDA. The occurrence of any unacceptable serious adverse events during or after preclinical and clinical testing of our product candidates could temporarily delay or negate the possibility of regulatory approval of our product candidates and adversely affect our business. Both our trials and independent trials have reported the occurrence of irregular heartbeats in treated patients, a significant risk to patient safety. We and our competitors have also, at times, suspended trials studying the effects of myoblasts, at least temporarily, to assess the risk of irregular heartbeats, and it has been reported that one of our competitors studying the effect of myoblast implantation prematurely discontinued a study because of the high incidence of irregular heartbeats. While we believe irregular heartbeats may be manageable with the use of certain prophylactic measures including an ICD, and antiarrhythmic drug therapy, these risk management techniques may not prove to sufficiently reduce the risk of unacceptable side effects."
That's their words (Bioheart, BHRT) and commentary from their, SEC filed 10-K, legal document- cut n pasted verbatim. Not my opinion or any words of mine.
Make of it what you will. They obviously, IMO had to insert it in the 10-K and other documents for "legal disclosure" requirements. It says what it says. One can form an opinion or make of it whatever they wish IMO.
Same 10-K, same page, 31 (just added info):
"In the SEISMIC Trial, we experienced delays attributable to slower than anticipated enrollment of patients. We may continue to experience difficulties in enrolling patients in our clinical trials, which could increase the costs or affect the timing or outcome of these trials and could prevent us from completing these trials.
Failures or perceived failures in our clinical trials would delay and may prevent our product development and regulatory approval process, make it difficult for us to establish collaborations, negatively affect our reputation and competitive position and otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business."
Again, their words, cut n pasted. Make of um what you will IMO. That area of the 10-K, pages 29 to about 31, IMO have some pretty important items in them. As in real important disclosures regarding the "trials", things already happened in past trials, and all the possible risks, adverse events, business implications, etc. Anyone doing due diligence, IMO should read the 10-K(s) always(all SEC documents IMO) cover to cover- but some areas/sections especially IMO, if they want the "true" picture as being stated in management's own commentary and words/wording.
Again, just my opinions and words from their own SEC documents- make of it whatever you want or form your own opinions.
Couldn't be MORE WRONG IMO. ZERO indication that BHRT has, or will have ANY positive "cash flow" now, or anywhere even remotely in the distant future in my opinion.
Challenge anyone to put a single 10-K, or other statement of fact to prove otherwise- even in the slightest.
From most recent 10-K, PAGE 26:
"We are a development stage life sciences company with a limited operating history and a history of net losses and negative cash flows from operations. We may never be profitable, and if we incur operating losses and generate negative cash flows from operations for longer than expected, we may be unable to continue operations.
We are a development stage life sciences company and have a limited operating history, limited capital, limited sources of revenue and have incurred losses since inception. Our operations to date have been limited to organizing our company, developing and engaging in clinical trials of our MyoCell product candidate, expanding our pipeline of complementary product candidates through internal development and third party licenses, expanding and strengthening our intellectual property position through internal programs and third party licenses and recruiting management, research and clinical personnel. Consequently, it may be difficult to predict our future success or viability due to our lack of operating history. As of December 31, 2013, we have accumulated a deficit during our development stage of approximately $118.2 million. Our MyoCell product candidate has not received regulatory approval or generated any material revenues and is not expected to generate any material revenues until commercialization of MyoCell, if ever. Since inception, we have generated substantial net losses, including net losses of approximately $3.1 million, $4.0 million, $4.7 million, $5.2 million, and $4.4 million in 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively and substantial negative cash flows from operations. We anticipate that we will continue to incur SIGNIFICANT and INCREASING net losses and negative cash flows from operations for the foreseeable future as we:
"
Same 10-K, most recent, PAGE F-4 (the balance sheet)
TOTAL revenues for all of year 2013 was a paltry (my opinion) $96,085.00. Cost of sales was $30,831 resulting in a gross profit (meaning prior to taxes, etc) of only $65,254 for the year. That barely pays the rent for a year on the 5000 sq-ft "leased" office "suite" and/or just barely even pays the base salary for ONE MONTH of the two "key" employees. ($391K for CEO + $159K for CSO = $550K / 12 = $45K per MONTH.)
There is not IMO, one SHRED of proof anywhere, they BHRT, is even remotely close to reaching "cash flow positive" status, NONE IMO. Prove otherwise. State the amount they would need to become "cash flow positive", when and where it's coming from (site 10-K or 10-K or SEC documents only, no speculation, hype, conjecture, made up opinions, etc)- please show calculations and exact amount, as it can easily be calculated. Easily.
I'd posit, that one doesn't even know what it means to be "cash flow positive" or how to do the calculations, based on those loss numbers from the 10-K for each respective yr (including net losses of approximately $3.1 million, $4.0 million, $4.7 million, $5.2 million, and $4.4 million in 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively and substantial negative cash flows from operations)
FACTS from 10-K, versus pure speculation, conjecture and just pure made up opinions based on no facts that are ever presented IMO. Couldn't be more wrong in the assertion they are somehow "nearing cash flow positive"- not even close IMO.
Oh, and why did BHRT BURY (IMO) the SEC doc filing after market close and heading into a 3 day weekend, and doesn't blast it out there proudly in a "PR", like every other "announcement" they make- from who's going to a "conference" to what "award" someone is getting, or any other number of "trivial" announcement "PR's" IMO? Why? Why not? I mean if it's such a GREAT THING, why not put it out before market opening on say a Monday, with a big ole PR and "tweet" and "facebook" update and "blog" and all and what not to go along with the ole "good news"? That's my opinion only of course- but "natural" questions one would ask, IMHO?
My opinions only, do one's own due diligence. Buy, sell, hold, trade or join a Boy Scout troop, whatever one wants to do- all is just my opinions only and no recommendation or any kind. Just an amateur who reads the 10-K and similar.
Oh, and GO $BHRT and HAPPY TRADING and GOOD LUCK.
DILUTION ANNOUNCEMENT- put out after market close, on the day before Good Friday, when the markets will be closed for an extended weekend.
(2014-04-17 16:30:46) That's 4:30 PM on the day before a 3 day weekend.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1388319/000114544314000493/d31298.htm
"The actions to be effective twenty days after the mailing of this Information Statement are as follows:
Ratification of the increase of the authorized shares of capital stock of the Company 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, effective as of the filing of an amendment to the Company's Articles of Incorporation with the Florida Secretary of State."
You're about to dilute the common shares by a staggering amount. When do you release the "news"? Well, it's common market knowledge that companies like to put out, what will probably be, received as "bad news", 1) After hours and 2) Heading into a long weekend when the market is closed, is even better usually.
It's common stock market knowledge IMO.
"Back in 2011 in that video,
Mike Tomas said about 10 million is needed to finalize the trials. There is now about 11 million in debt I believe.
If they get $20 million in a financing deal say by selling shares @ .03. That's about 700 million shares. That would cover the debt and trials and have enough left over to pay themselves in shares in lieu of salaries in the mean time when necessary IMO."??
Huh? What? Why? How?
Laughable IMO. Did anything from the ole 2011 video come true yet? They've spent $10 MILLION since then (read 10-K, most recent)- what happened? Did the big, key, "flagship" ole phase II/III "trial" even advance in the slightest? Even move partially forward in those FOUR years?
So, why would a "deal" suddenly "work" now in 2014, when they're even in worse financial condition IMO than when that video was made? The stock is enormously more diluted now than in 2011, making it/the company even less attractive now to some "investor" IMHO. How many people, with the kind of money to plunk down $20 million, of all the 1000's of investment choices out there, or companies they could buy, 100% outright- enormously profitable and growing companies for that kind of money- would sink that $20 million, of all places, into a 463 MILLION shares outstanding, 3 penny, cash poor, hugely negative cash flow, loss taking, 4 or 5 total employee "company" that doesn't even have any real hard assets like real estate or plants and equipment, etc? Who with $20 mil to sink would do that and for what possible reasons? Why? Don't see it or "get it" in the slightest IMHO? Not the slightest? There is a LOT of other investment opportunities out there for someone with $20 million in coin, real good ones, why would they pick this?
Further, WHO is going to want to, or would/will "buy" $20 million worth of shares of this 3 cent, cash poor, no sales, no revenue, 4 or 5 employee company? Who and why would they? Seriously? Someone is going to step in an plunk down a chunk of coin for $20 million to buy a 3 cent penny company's stock? Why wouldn't they just buy-out the entire company right now for less than that, or close to that when the market cap + debt for a long, long time was far less than $20 million? When it was 1 cent a share, only months ago, "someone", this fantasy conjecture "big investor" could have bought out the entire thing for less than $20 million? Why no offers or buys then? Why?
Pure fantasy conjecture and dreaming and made up opinions IMHO.
Buy, sell, hold, love it, dream on, do your own due diligence- whatever makes one happy. My opinions and thoughts and ideas and statements are mine only. Not meant to advise or formulate and opinion about any stock, company or weather patterns over the Pacific Ocean or otherwise.
Oh, and HAPPPY TRADING and GO $BHRT. Wonder where all the "others" vanished off too? Interesting to say the least, eh? Market closed, SILENCE is near deafening?
"mezzanine financing"??
Just keep tossing the ole word "mezzanine financing" out there- without clue ONE, what "mezzanine financing" is or how it works, or what it takes typically to get/secure, etc. Yep, that'll make it happen and come "true".
And call up ole investorstemblahblah- as if he knows anything IMO? He runs a tiny web site about stem penny stocks? How many "mezzanine financing" deals does one know for certain he's ever arranged and successfully put together for cash poor, cash flow negative, near zero asset companies? Would be curious myself to know? Can one add that to the ole "PM" please?
Here is a statement of a typical "mezzanine company" and them explaining a "mezzanine debt/share hyprid" typical "mezzanine type deal and what they look for/require:
https://vcexperts.com/buzz_articles/339
"Sources of Capital: Mezzanine Funds
Kenneth H. Marks, Larry E. Robbins, Gonzalo Fernandez, John P. Funkhouser et al
The base content of this section is adapted from "Mezzanine Capital Financing for Small and Midsize Businesses," written by Donald Tyson, PNC Bank.
Mezzanine funds are typically subordinated debt lenders and seek businesses that have high potential for growth and earnings but are currently unable to obtain from a bank all of the funds necessary to achieve their goals. This may be because of a lack of collateral, higher balance sheet leverage, shorter operating history, or a variety of other, transitional reasons. As risk lenders, mezzanine investors consider investment opportunities outside conventional commercial bank parameters. Ideally, mezzanine investors prefer companies that, in a three-to-five-year period, can exit mezzanine financing through additional debt from a senior lender, an initial public offering, or an acquisition. In addition to these financial criteria, a critical consideration is the quality of the people involved. Strong management is important, and mezzanine investors look closely at an entrepreneur's hands-on operating achievements and proven management ability. The track record of a company's management team is a valuable indicator of its ability to achieve future success.
The typical borrowing profile of a company funded by a mezzanine fund is:
Strong management.
Strong cash flow.
Insufficient senior financing.
Insufficient collateral.
High leverage.
Mezzanine funds typically provide financing for:
Acquisitions and management buyouts.
Business expansion.
Recapitalizations.
New product launches and diversification.
Long-term working capital to support growth.
Equipment and owner-occupied real estate purchases.
Dividends.
Businesses and situations usually not of interest to mezzanine investors include:
Start-ups.
Seed capital.
Prerevenue or development stage companies.
Non-owner-occupied real estate investment.
Any business unable to support additional debt service from its cash flow.
Turnaround situations."
http://www.srr.com/article/benefits-mezzanine-financing-middle-market-companies
In addition, there may be certain business or transaction characteristics which make it difficult to utilize mezzanine financing. These attributes may include but are not limited to the following:
High customer concentration
Capital expenditure intensive business
Lack of management
Commodity-like products or services
Cyclicality resulting in volatile cash flow (how bout NO CASH FLOW?)
A current debt to EBITDA ratio close to or exceeding the market value of the company"
This link is from Canada- but banking/lending is lending, especially someone as aligned with us (USA) as Canada:
https://precipicecapital.com/mezzanine-financing-a-powerful-financing-vehicle-for-growth/
"Mezzanine financing is available for companies with strong cash flows. Although there are some limited exceptions in Canada, the majority of mezzanine lenders require historical cash flows to be at a minimum of $2M when looking at historical performance over a three year term."
http://www.fidelisfinancial.com/mezzfund.htm
"Here are some general criteria to be qualified for Mezzanine Financing:
1. The company is in business for 3 years or more.
2. Has a stable or growing “Operating Cash Flow” of between $3 million and $25 million (defined as Earnings before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, Amortization and nonrecurring costs).
3. Has a defensible market position in its niche."
From most recent BHRT 10-K, PAGE 26
". Since inception, we have generated substantial net losses, including net losses of approximately $3.1 million, $4.0 million, $4.7 million, $5.2 million, and $4.4 million in 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively and substantial negative cash flows from operations. We anticipate that we will continue to incur significant and increasing net losses and negative cash flows from operations for the foreseeable future as we:..:
Yeah, sounds perfect for a "debt" based ole "mezzanine financing" deal IMHO? Sure thing. Great. Right on.
Always just my own opinions, musings, thought and ideas and OPINIONS only of course. Do your own due diligence. Never buy, sell, trade a stock or anything else, or like or dislike a company based on my 100% amateur opinions. And of course- always wear a seat belt when driving, it's the law.
Oh, and HAPPY TRADING and GO $BHRT !!
Who is investorstemblahblah to KNOW ANYTHING, IMO?
Is he an insider or trading/stating INSIDER INFO? How many times is his, 100% conjecture based, 100% pure speculative based statement(s) going to be repeated, when there are ZERO facts to back them up?
Same for repeating the PR or 10-K statment about "Cassel". The word "MAY" (as in might, could, could not, might not, etc) is inserted in there for a reason IMO. The entire "Cassel" statement says a whole lot more than just that of "subordinated debt" or "mezzanine" being inserted into the wording IMO. It speaks also of "equity based" so called "financing" which "may" be nothing more than more "floorless convertible" (aka ASHER type deals) for all anyone knows- and thus would meet the definition and statements made regarding them IMO. Big whoop. Further, BHRT has lots of PR going back years, full of key words like "May" or "might" or even "will" and they never came true or produced some big "financing deal"- can link to lots of um, so what IMO?
Issuing shares, as in COMMON STOCK is not a "loan" or "debt"? Since when were they even related concepts?
A LOAN is just that- a DEBT BASED LOAN given to people normally with collateral and CASH FLOW to PAY IT BACK, etc.
Is there anything even remotely like that here? Further, read the Northstar stipulations in past 10-K's; when they were granted a "lien" on essentially everything this company does own (which is not much), may ever own or produce, patents, intellectual property, etc It has statement in it that EVERYTHING essentially must be "subordinate" to them.
WHO, what bank or lender of debt, is going to sign on with a cash poor, cash flow negative, not anywhere near cash flow positive or anywhere near profit based company- in line behind a bunch of other people who are guaranteed already to get paid back first?
Yeah, lets have some "guy" over at a pennny stem-cell site make some "comment" and then repeat it 100 times and what, "hope" that somehow makes it actually credible or based even remotely in truth?
BHRT has diluted shares by the dump truck full for over 4 yrs now. They DOUBLED the outstanding shares just last yr (more than doubled actually) - from 190 million out, to now 460 million plus as of the filing of that proxy- which by the way, says the COMMON SHAREHOLDER DOES NOT MATTER ANYWAY, as WE THE INSIDERS have STACKED THE VOTES SO WE CONTROL ALL VOTING- so don't worry about doing anything with the proxy (paraphrasing- read it for one's self) Did that massive dilution result in a "subordinated debt" lender of some sort ever "materializing" or "big financing" ever appearing? NO. Never happened. So why now? Cause some investorstemblahblah guy say so or makes a pure conjecture "claim"? Really? That's how it works? Fascinating IMHO?
IMO, there is no connection to any "imminent" debt instrument "about" to "materialize"? When does diluting the common shares by an enormous amount = some imminent debt instrument arrangement? Cite some case studies or recent examples?
Debt, other than "convertible share, floorless deals" (which being floorless guarantees they, the "lender" of the "note" can never lose money- and actually can make more, the lower the stock goes)- other than that, what "debt/loan" is made to people who have almost no cash, no cash flow, etc? COLLATERAL is part of "debt/loan" deals IMO and that of every "lender" I'm familiar with?
My 2 cent opinions- buy,sell, hold or start a stamp collection via doing your own due diligence and don't read or understand or even make sense of my amateur opinions unless one wants to.
Oh, and HAPPY TRADING and GOOD LUCK and GO $BHRT !!
Here is the Northstar "constraints" (my word): Latest 10-K, PAGE 25/26
"Our ability to obtain additional debt financing and/or alternative arrangements, with the Guarantors or otherwise, may be limited by the amount of, terms and restrictions of our then current debt. For instance, we do not anticipate repaying our Northstar loan (described below) until its scheduled maturity. Accordingly, until such time,
we will generally be restricted from, among other things, incurring additional indebtedness or liens, with limited exceptions. See “We have a substantial amount of debt...” Additional debt financing, if available, may involve restrictive covenants that limit or further limit our operating and financial flexibility and prohibit us from making distributions to shareholders.
If we raise additional capital and/or secure alternative arrangements, with the Guarantors or otherwise, by issuing equity, equity-related or convertible securities, the economic, voting and other rights of our existing shareholders may be diluted, and those newly issued securities may be issued at prices that are a significant discount to current and/or then prevailing market prices. In addition, any such newly issued securities may have rights superior to those of our common stock. If we obtain additional capital through collaborative arrangements, we may be required to relinquish greater rights to our technologies or product candidates than we might otherwise have or become subject to restrictive covenants that may affect our business."
And, same 10-K, PAGE 28/29:
"In addition, the Company executed a security agreement granting Northstar a lien on all patents, patent applications, trademarks, service marks, copyrights and intellectual property
rights of any nature, as well as the results of all clinical trials, know-how for preparing Myblasts, old and new clinical data, existing approved trials, all right and title to Myoblasts, clinical trial protocols and other property rights. In addition, the Company granted Northstar a perpetual license on products as described for resale, relicensing and commercialization outside the United States. In connection with the granted license, Northstar shall pay the Company a royalty of up to 8% on revenues generated.
In addition to the limitations imposed on our operational flexibility by the Northstar loan as described above, the Northstar loan, the Seaside National Bank loan, our obligations to the Guarantors, and any other indebtedness incurred by us could have significant additional negative consequences, including, without limitation:
requiring the dedication of a portion of our available cash to service our indebtedness, thereby reducing the amount of our cash available for other purposes, including funding our research and development programs and other capital expenditures;
·
increasing our vulnerability to general adverse economic and industry conditions;
·
limiting our ability to obtain additional financing;
·
limiting our ability to react to changes in technology or our business; and
·
placing us at a possible competitive disadvantage to less leveraged competitors."
Mezzanine- USE THE WORD, BUT DON'T have CLUE ONE, what it means. TYPICAL. Also, selectively citing pages from the document- while leaving out, real important, little "tid bits"- as always.
Mezzanine financing is a DEBT/equity "hybrid" finance deal- as in a "debt" loan w/ interest (pretty high interest) and is always, almost always based on a company's CASH FLOW and EBITA (earnings) and thus, ability to REPAY THE DEBT INSTRUMENT FROM POSITIVE CASH FLOW and EARNINGS. Who is willing to go "subordinate" to other debt a company may be holding- thus be in the back of the line to get repaid if they go BK or whatever, if they don't have a HIGH confidence in the credit rating strength of the company to generate cash flow to PAY THEM BACK, w/ interest and ON TIME? WHO? The "equity" portion spoken of, is nearly always "preferred" shares, not common, and are only part of the structure of the deal. Mezzanine deals, none that I know of, are not done to cash broke, zero cash flow, essentially zero sales, debt riddled companies.
See the words "subordinated" in the terminology- it's means they're willing to go in 2nd or even 3rd place- but they have ways to guarantee to still get paid, and also are relying on the high credit worthiness of the company doing the deal- as in, they have a long track record of steadily growing cash flow and earnings and a high growth rate- and thus need a "mezzanine"( word for a bridge) to get them over a short period to an even greater size and growth level. LOOK IT UP- read about how a typical mezzanine deal is structured and what kind of company's get them and what they need to qualify for them typically. Just tossing out a word- doesn't mean it has a chance in heck of ever even remotely being a truth or possibility. And citing some penny stem cell site "dude" as some sort of biz authority is beyond laughable IMO. Yeah, ole investorstemblahblah "said"- like he knows what he's talking about? Right. Sure thing.
Here's some tid bits left out of the links:
1) Notice the word "may" (as in might, could, maybe- then again, NEVER, COULD NEVER, MAY NEVER) in the Caseel quote. Cassel also specializes in company restructures, BK's, value assessments- as in liquidations and going out of biz, etc. Kinda left that out.
" Part of these services MAY involve the closing of a Mezzanine Financing consisting of non-convertible subordinated debt and/or sale of equity securities" (may means MAYBE, could, might- and may NEVER happen)
Page 51:
"There are NO definitive agreements at present for a Mezzanine Financing" Notice- NONE, no "deals". It's a "may" - they just insert that wording, "IF" ole Cassel "might" put together a mezzanine, then they get paid XYZ. But it doesn't say that's the primary reason they were hired or are getting paid and got stock shares too: PAGE 38:
"Cassel Salpeter & Co. is an independent investment banking firm that provides advice to middle-market and emerging growth companies in the U.S. and worldwide. Together, the firm’s professionals have more than 50 years of experience providing private and public companies with a broad spectrum of investment banking and financial advisory services, including: mergers and acquisitions; equity and debt capital raises; fairness and SOLVENCY opinions; valuations; and restructurings, such as 363 sales and PLANS OF REORGANIZATIONS. " (a 363 sale for instance is a type of BK sale)
Further, I can go back and link to NUMEROUS other, old "PR" in which other "firms" were "hired" to supposedly "assist" in capital raising and "financing deals" and so forth- and guess what ever became of all those old "deals"? NOTHING. Not a thing- I've got every link to every one. Big WHOOP.
Further, from the same document: PAGE 51, (just happen to be left out of the hype statements, as is typical IMO)
"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."
Sorta left out some of those ole "pesky" little details in the hyper "claims" of all the wonderful, supposed things to come via massively diluting the shares.
All my 2 cent opinions. Mine only. Do your own due diligence.
Good luck and happy $BHRT trading.
Debunking the MYTHS's (MY OPINION) that 2 BILLION shares somehow = a "partner" or "mezzanine" financing, or "a good thing" or "imminent success" or blah, blah, blah.
2 BILLION shares on a 3 penny stock is going to CRUSH it further close to zero, IMO. And all historic proof will bear that out, again IMO. Dilution, massive dilution, nearly always causes the common share price to head lower, rarely ever higher, unless the company has significant sales, can buy other companies with the shares sold (growth by capital raising/acquisitions), thus produce more earnings and profits- in a rapid fashion, in the near future with the diluted shares- NONE of which I see happening in this case IMHO only.
The total shares outstanding in 3/31/2010 10-K filing:
as of February 28, 2010 was 20,489,444. (20 MILLION SHARES TOTAL)
As of this proxy filing today, April 17th, 2014:
463,274,232 common shares; (463 MILLION SHARES)
And remember- there was only about 190 MILLION shares outstanding as of 1 yr ago, at which point they blew through that limit and upped (had to amend corporate rules, whatever to allow the increase) upped the "allowed" amount to about 950 MILLION from a previous 200 million share limit.
So, in just the past yr (2013) they blew through over 200 MILLION shares and ended with $46K total cash in the bank (Dec 31st, 2013 10-K). And, just since this most recent 10-K, they already went from 420 MILLION or so , to now 463 MILLION, that is how fast the massive dilution is occurring.
So- given that since 2010, they went from about 20 MILLION shares out, to today, now about 460 MILLION shares out- did ANY of the following "claims" being made occur:
1) Did it cause a "partnership" to "materialize"? NO.
2) Did it = some "mezzanine financing or similar? NO. In fact it's been endless, "vulture" and other "floorless convertible" so called "financing", and every dilutive "financing" known being used clear back to that 2010 period IMO.
3) WHAT has all this dilution and HIGHLY DILUTIVE "financing" done to the share price? (someone posted, "What's the big deal, IF it leads to the Mirror trial being enrolled" or blah, blah, blah?)
Well, the share price in 2010 was about 60 cents a share to as high as 90 cents a share- in Jan 2010.
Today, after being diluted by over 400 MILLION SHARES, the share price stands at about 3 CENTS a share, and recently as low as 1 PENNY A SHARE. THAT is what massive "dilution" does to the common share holder and the share price.
Lets give a few examples of what a 2 BILLION share company typically looks like:
FACEBOOK (one of he most successful IPO's in stock market history)
Shares outstanding 2.5 BILLION, market cap $150 BILLION, cash $11 BILLION, operating cash flow- over $4 BILLION.
BAXTER- an enormously profitable and successful med, bio-tech company. Shares outstanding 540 MILLION. Yep, will have less shares out than ole BHRT soon. Baxter market cap $40 BILLION dollars. Operating cash flow- over $3 BILLION dollars on sales of $15 billion, pays great dividend.
Chevron- one of the most well run, successful, profitable OIL MAJOR companies on PLANET EARTH. Share outstanding, 2.1 BILLION. Market cap $236 BILLION on revenues of $211 BILLION annually. Operating cash flow $35 BILLION dollars, pays rock solid dividends. THAT is a 2 BILLION shares outstanding company- at about $123.00 per share, not 3 PENNIES.
EVERY EVENT, EVERY "PR", no matter what it says- gets the same old, broken record IMO, reply of "PARTNERSHIP" or "BIG FINANCING" "must" be coming "soon" and blah, blah, blah. FOUR YEARS- and it has never happened yet. Including the Northstar "claim" that they were going to go out and "raise" supposedly $20 MILLION in a "private placement"- and I can list many other "PR's" that made "claims" of "term sheets" being "signed" and "imminent" financing that "probably" was "about" to happen and on and on and on.
So, why would upping the shares now, to an incredible 2 BILLION shares being allocated, on a 3 PENNY stock = any of these "claims" being made about a "partner" or "financing" (especially mezzanine- which I'd put bank on it, the one making the claim doesn't even know what, or how a "mezzanine" financing deal works or is constructed).
WHY would any of these vast, hype "claims" suddenly be true now? Oh, and the "claim" was made that the 950 allocated now would "easily" cover the financing deals and convertibles and all, already in place, thus, it MUST = a "partnership"?? Huh? How can anyone but an insider possibly know that? They're already at 460 million shares. They put out 50 MILLION warrants we know of. They did numerous "floorless convertible" share deals in 2013- we don't have a clue how many shares will be needed if they are all converted. Perhaps, they, BHRT knows that in about say, 4 or 6 months perhaps, they'll be blowing through say 700 million shares outstanding for example and rapidly approaching that 950 million mark.
So, what do they do- they just pull a pie in the sky number out of the air, 2 BILLION SHARES, and figure that should cover um, from getting backed up against the share limit- for as long as they can keep this gig alive and going. That's it IMO.
NOTHING from the past, IMO, indicates this shows ANY "deal" or "partner" or anything else as being "imminent". It tells me- just expect more share crushing dilutive financing "deals" with the likes of ASHER and similar- and who knows what to the "guarantors" of that loan that needed to be renewed, and insiders getting shares, and more warrants being handed out and all the rest. THAT is all it means IMO. Anything else is just the typical, heard it a 100 times before IMO, hype and speculation and same old, same old conjecture that's been repeated ad nauseum, for years.
That's my opinions and mine only. No recommendation to buy, sell or hold this stock or any other. Doesn't imply or claim anything about the company other than my own 2 cent opinions and thoughts and musings- from watching the stock and looking at its past performance and reading their SEC documents, etc. Do your own due diligence- and do what ever you want. Like it, love it, buy, sell- whatever.
Oh, and happy trading and good luck and $BHRT (the code symbol I guess, eh?)
"Partnership!!?? How bout desperation dilution? WHY would massively increasing the shares, in any way, shape or form indicate a supposed "partnership"?
Why just make up conjecture? People don't massively dilute or need more authorized shares for a "partnership"? Since when?
They've needed shares for one thing and one thing only for 2 plus yrs now- and that's to dump in massive dilution to survive. Show any other example of them using shares otherwise?
They still have 400 million plus already- why go to 2 BILLION for some supposed "partnership"? What sense would that make? Not even close IMO?
2 BILLION SHARES- you've gotta be freaking kidding? If this isn't pure desperation, then what is IMO?
The insiders (Northstar has stacked the preferred shares so they have total voting power, as far as I'm aware, so the common holder's vote or "proxy" makes no difference IMO- which I believe at a glance, this filing essentially says so anyway)- will read it again more carefully later when get the time.
But they must be in worse, desperation straights than even imagined IMO. What in the heck are they going to need 2 BILLION shares for? That Seaside loan need to be "re-guaranteed" or whatever? Something like that, IMO must be up? As in they're about to blow through the 500 million shares left now- from 420 million to get to 950 million, and know they will need more already, and soon, apparently? To go from 950 million to 2 BILLION? Holy WOW.
If not desperate or in trouble or something financially, else, why even do this? Makes ZERO sense IMO, other than something must be desperate and they are going to do even more, massive, massive diluting.
That's my 2 cent opinion on it and mine only. Do your own due diligence. No way IMO this can be a sign, even remotely of anything "good". They're pouring out, dumping shares like freaking water on a 3 penny stock? Smells of pure, desperation survival mode IMO. They must need to give someone/some people boat loads, as in 100's of millions of shares- since they are only at 420 million as of last 10-K, Dec 31st, 2013 and have 950 million or so authorized- but now want to take it to 2 FREAKING BA BILLION shares?
Oh, notice upon re-reading it- it's now 463 MILLION shares. So just from the time of the 10-K release, a few weeks back, they went from 420 MILLION, to now 463 MILLION already. More dumping for "financing" I guess? Or, "convertibles" (the toxic floorless) being converted- which would explain the massive price drop this week IMO. WOW !
Wow, is all I can say. Amazing wow. My opinion- the ship is taking on water and SINKING. That's how I see it with that latest "news". Desperation IMO.
Again- my opinion, make of it whatever you want. Not a recommendation or anything to buy, sell, hold, or about what anyone else should think about the company or the stock, just my own musings and opinions and my "take" on what I think- and I'm nothing but a total amateur, just an opinion out there. Just my lousy 2 cent opinion only.
SOLID DOWN TREND is confirmed now IMO. It blew through the 50 DMA avg (.035), 3 days ago on high vol, touching as low as .025 that day. It's had 3 confirmed days now under the 50 DMA moving avg with no bounce or return to even touching the 50 DMA.
So, despite all the vapid, orchestrated hype, it's going down IMO. The 200 DMA is at .019 and that's most likely where it will land, if not lower. About 2 cents at this point is the target for me- and is the historic norm for over 2 yrs anyways.
The market cap is now back to a paltry $12 million or so- which, when considering their massive debt ratio and cash deficit shortages as stated in the going concern warning of their own auditors and most recent 10-K; the company is essentially being valued at ZERO now by the market. Not even enough to cover the debt/deficits if liquidated. They're busted, broke IMO. Simple as that.
All the hype in the world doesn't seem to be making any difference. Oh, and negotiating "away" that debt, went over like a lead balloon IMO. Fell off the cliff from that point on.
Hey, where's all those "big investors" that "Were" and "maybe" and "might have been" going to "materialize" as in "real soon" and "imminent" and "for sure" this time?
Just curious- cause I'm watching and looking for um, but sure haven't seen or heard about um or found um yet? Any clue where they're hiding out?
Oh, all just my opinions of course- no recommendation from an amateur, who really doesn't know much about stocks or trading, nor do I ever recommend to buy or sell or trade anything- and no, I don't have any penny pump stock site to link to or promote- so I guess I'm in the new minority here now. And of course- don't ride bicycles or motorcycles without a helmet, or change your favorite radio station based on anything I say or state- as it's all just my 2 cent, lousy (by self admission) opinions and thoughts only, and are only for me and anyone else who cares to read them- but are for enjoyment or amusement only.
And Happy Trading and GOOD LUCK to all of course- hope you all make $BILLIONS of course. Happy, happy, happy, bestes luck to all !!!
"Bioheart just confirmed it was them via twitter!"??
What PROOF do you have that it's even them "running" or even doing the posting on twitter? I can set up a "twitter" account in about 35 seconds, and name it ANYTHING I WANT. There is ZERO verification or anything needed to open a twitter account.
As if this nonsense comes up on here about some penny pump site- and now, "supposedly", the "discussion" starts about how "twitter will be needed" to supposedly "confirm" and then wait, wait a few minutes and what-
SHAZAM, the ole supposed "confirmation" just "appears" on ole "twitter". ANYONE could have made that "twitter" post- including the one running the very penny pump site.
Simple as that IMO. MEANS NOTHING. Oldest "tricks" in the book IMO. Laughable IMO. Again, check twitter- if needed, I'll set up an account right now and link to it and make it look "official" and all, and I can say it's "company" named "xyz" and that I'm the "world leader" in "smidget widgets" - BIG WHOOP DEAL. Would take me less than 5 minutes to do.
Means nothing IMHO. Not a thing. If it excites you, then great. I think it doesn't mean a thing. Nothing IMO. And that's just it- MY OPINION ONLY. Don't buy, sell, hold, trade or watch any particular TV channel because of anything I state. It's only my opinions for my own reflections and thoughts and not meant to influence anyone, or even have anyone else care about them or even read them if they don't want to.
Good luck to all and happy trading, as many like to say in their "professional" disclosures and disclaimers.
" new study for DDD which will include a randomized control arm. The study has been reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the International Cellular Medicine Society (ICMS). The ICMS IRB is committed to providing peer review of proposed studies of cell-based medical therapies based upon appropriate clinical translation, patient care and safety."
And blah, blah, blah, blah. MIRROR ANYONE? Hello? OR FDA, FDA, FDA. And what money will PAY FOR THIS "study"? And when, if ever, would any results ever be expected, let alone commercialization or monetization- what, "maybe" 5 to 10 yrs from now would be realistic per industry standards IMO?
WHO is the ole "International Cellular Medicine Society (ICMS)"???
Might want to check the recent FDA AUDIT they underwent and the subsequent findings and comments by the FDA regarding the "ICMS".
http://www.cellmedicinesociety.org/attachments/415_FDA%20483%20-%20ICMS%20IRB%20-%2019%20June%202012%20(redacted).pdf
http://www.cellmedicinesociety.org/home/boards-and-councils/414-fda-audit
http://www.cellmedicinesociety.org/home/boards-and-councils/415-fda-audit-findings
ALL my own opinions of course, no recommendation to buy, sell or hold any stock, or make anyone think or care about this particular company, or any company for that matter- just all my humble, 2 cent opinions from someone who is a total amateur stock trader/investor and knows nothing much about anything. Buy, sell or hold anything you want on your own- even comic book collectibles or Disney cartoon characters. It's all up to you and what you want to do- I only reflect on my own thoughts and own opinions and ideas and for my own self, not for anyone else.
Good luck and good trading/investing to all.