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.
If you take another look at my Post you will see that I acknowledge that the suit has been settled and that I am glad it is done.
Sheesh.
I merely indicated that it would be nice if PCTL winds up with a big settlement amount, but that it appears that the Defendants felt so strongly about their position, that they countersued. This would appear to imply that it may not have been completely “cut & dry”, and the lengthy negotiations to arrive at a settlement recently appears to indicate that factors from both sides may have had to be taken into account.
Nobody knows to what extent the above may be the case (unless they were a party to the trial or had a NDA), and I agree that it would appear that it was a simple matter in favor of PCTL ... but there may have been a bit more to it than we as general public are aware of.
you wrote:
you wrote:
you wrote:
Why? Because I was looking to make a point about a certain portion of his post.
Anyways, I can see his perspective, and I am ready to drop the back & forth on it (rather than running in circles).
I understand your theory.
However, what are your thoughts if you reverse it (assuming that PCTL or a distributor decides they want to produce both Catholyte & Hydrolyte):
"PCTL's Hydrolyte is a byproduct of PCTL's Catholyte production.
It stands to reason Hydrolyte is being produced at no additional cost.
So every gallon of Hydrolyte sold is pure profit."
(Above also assumes that the fluids are produced in equal quantities during the manufacturing process. Even if it is say a 3 to 1 ratio, the above still illustrates that it is misleading to consider the fluid being “free” and that it can be sold for “pure profit”). IMO
you wrote:
Yes, I believe the info in Post #150201 is "old news".
you wrote:
you wrote:
I like your post in general.
I think it is hard to imagine, however, for the PCTL share price to increase to $0.10, $0.25, $0.50, $1.00, $4.00 etc ... unless they show a substantial "Net Profit".
I am not an accountant, but I would think that when they are manufacturing a bunch of Annihilyzers, that this could wind up as a Capital Expense to go onto the Balance Sheet as assets.
I realize that there would be interest expenses that could be high for the manufacturing of a bunch of equipment.
The "Net Profit" that I think needs to start being achieved is before any such interest payments.
So more like "Net Operating Income" ... the Operating Revenues minus the Operating Expenses.
In other words, there is Cost of Goods Sold (COGS) related to the generation of Revenues, and then there are other Operating Expenses such as "General & Administrative", which includes payroll expenses (which is a growing number ... more personnel & consultants are being added in order to achieve the higher level of revenues).
Summary overview of some Key Figures:
2019:
Total Revenue $708,405
Cost of product, licensing and equipment leases $123,223
Gross Profit, before other Operating Expenses: $585,182
General and administrative expenses: $1,922,941
Research & development $6,149
Net Operating Income, before Depreciation, amortization and Other Expenses: $(1,343,908)
2020 - 1st 9 months:
Total Revenue $1,937,442
Cost of product, licensing and equipment leases $619,606
Gross Profit, before other Operating Expenses: $1,317,836
General and administrative expenses: $1,755,495
Research & development $20,547
Net Operating Income, before Depreciation, amortization and Other Expenses: $(458,206)
If GG can still achieve his earlier $4 Million revenue estimate for 2020, then I could see the figures come in something like this:
2020 - Full Year (estim)
Total Revenue $4,000,000
Cost of product, licensing and equipment leases $1,200,000
Gross Profit, before other Operating Expenses: $2,800,000
General and administrative expenses: $2,300,000
Research & development $40,000
Net Operating Income, before Depreciation, amortization and Other Expenses: $460,000.
If GG can achieve his $10 Million revenue estimate for 2021, then I could see the figures come in something like this:
2021 - Full Year (estim)
Total Revenue $10,000,000
Cost of product, licensing and equipment leases $3,000,000
Gross Profit, before other Operating Expenses: $7,000,000
General and administrative expenses: $3,000,000
Research & development $100,000
Net Operating Income, before Depreciation, amortization and Other Expenses: $3,900,000.
Having the NOI go from a Loss of almost $1.5 Million, to a profit of around $0.5 Million to a profit of almost $4 Million would be great.
Without any additional upside surprises (such as additional revenue streams from OG & Agriculture etc), I think the above scenario (which I believe is realistic) should boost the SP well above $0.10.
I suspect that $0.06 share price should be “relatively easy” to reach.
You also mentioned $0.10 .... I think that is certainly very reachable within 2021, and as I previously stated I think a lot will depend on Net Profits that PCTL can start to book.
I think that a $0.10 could be seen if PCTL “merely” reaches its $10 Million (minimum expected) revenues, and manages a Net Profit of $2.5 Million.
Likewise, the SP could reach $0.20 if Net Profits are $5 Million.
Both of the above are reasonable.
2021 revenues may also “surprise to the upside”.
If PCTL breaks into new/additional Oil & Gas revenue streams, then 2022 forecast could go higher .... say $20 Million. Net Profits could increase in 2022 to $7 to $12 Million ... so Share Price could rise accordingly.
Of course it is harder to forecast going further into the future, but I think $0.50 could be reached in the next 3 to 5 years. I think it is premature to even look at the $1.00 to $4.00 share price that I have seen some mention.
Step at a time.
Bottom line: selling at merely $0.10 could be leaving substantial money on the table. However, it would still nearly be a 400% increase from recent levels, so hard to blame someone who would want to secure some profits at that price.
It is hard to estimate where the SP might be in your scenarios. Especially because it will depend to a great degree on how much money PCTL spends in the process of generating the revenues .... in other words it will depend a lot on what level of Net Profits they can generate.
I hope that we will hit at least $10 Million, and spend “only” $5 Million, and thus generate Net Profits of at least $5 Million.
In that scenario I would hope to see the SP increase to $0.20.
If PCTL expenses are $8 Million, and they generate Net Profits of $2 Million, then the SP might only increase to $0.09.
If they spend $10 Million in order to generate $10 Million in Revenues, then the SP may struggle to increase too much, unless it is clear that the expenses were made to also dramatically increase future revenues. Or unless there is some other part of “the story” that would justify expectation of dramatic Net Profit improvement.
Your scenario that PCTL might reach $10 Million in Revenue by Q3, and thus perhaps on track for Annual Revenues of perhaps $13.5 Million, seems like a reasonable “Positive Upside” surprise scenario.
But to even throw out a scenario of reaching $10 Million by Q2 (annualized revenues of $20 Million) ... we have no reason currently to justify that this would be a reasonable expectation, so I think this is not worthwhile even contemplating (yet). Perhaps after we get word of further positive O&G field tests with Catholye and accompanying orders being placed.
It would similarly be a bit silly to try to figure out what might happen to the Share Price if PCTL spends $18 Million to generate $10 Million in revenues, and wind up with a Net Loss of $8 Million. There is no reason to think that this may happen.
Bottom line ... a lot of the SP increase will depend on the Net Profits. I think it would be great if PCTL can generate $3 to $7 Million in Net Profit in 2021 ... and if they do that then the SP increase should make (most) longs quite happy.
In your post, it appears that you would find it useful to learn whether the 1 Million gallon contract (Maverick) would generate a minimum of $1 per gallon.
I do believe that at some point PCTL did indicate that the Million gallon contract would result in millions of revenue.
So in my mind I figure that the contract is for at least $2 per gallon.
Yes, it appears you misunderstood what I was trying to say.
I understand the confusion.
So for clarity: I was making reference to the revenues that PCTL generates on its profit & loss statements as a result of the royalties from the sales of their distributor who produces the eOn mist.
I realize that eOn mist sales revenues are “off the chart” ....perhaps in the order of 40 million units x $4 = $160 Million in 2020.
This may have generated up to $0.6 Million in revenues to PCTL, IMO, but that is just a bit of a wild guess, but takes into account the revenues that PCTL has published for the 1st nine months of 2020 (ie Product Revenues)..
Correction to my earlier post regarding revenues from eOn mist.
In the first 9 months of 2020, the "Product Revenues" were a tad above $1.2 Million.
If GG forecast of $4 Million total revenues comes true for 2020 (might actually come in a bit light), then I would expect the Product Revenues for Q4 to also be around $1.2 Million ... so total 2020 Product Revenues would be $2.4 Million.
This would include Product revenues from eOn Mist, plus the Product revenues from ALL other distributors, plus the Product revenues from sales at Little River.
It is hard to guess at what portion of the above Product revenues may relate to the royalties on the eOn Mist sales ... I still believe $600K or less.
(I am now under the impression that the Licensing revenues do not include product royalty revenues, but rather just the revenues from the sub-registrations of the EPA licensing).
Good DD Aandt.
Do you know who is Pentagon Technical in this PCTL tweet?
Regarding revenues from eOn mist.
In the first 9 months of 2020, the "Licensing Revenues" were $203,000.
If GG forecast of $4 Million total revenues comes true for 2020 (might actually come in a bit light), then I would expect the Licensing Revenues for Q4 to be $200K ... so total 2020 Licensing Revenues might be $400,000 tops.
This would include Licensing revenues from eOn Mist, plus the licensing revenues from ALL other distributors.
So this is why I believe that the sale of 40 Million cans of eOn mist (625,000 gallons) will result in less than $400K revenues to PCTL.
Huh?
Snow, you wrote:
You suggested it takes 32 cans of 2 oz to reach a gallon.
Instead: it takes 64 cans to reach a gallon. (128 ounces in a gallon)
At forecast of 40 million cans of eOn mist in 2020, I believe that the revenues to PCTL will be less than $500,000.
But: it is “easy money” ... as PCTL gets additional successful distributors around the country, it will all start to add up nicely.
And: PCTL can concentrate on their primary revenue sources of equipment sales & leasing and new revenues sources of Oil/Gas and Agriculture.
It appears that I may have misinterpreted your post. Sorry.
You suggest that the NWBO patents may have no significant value ... instead, perhaps the NWBO patents are worth Billions of Dollars.
“Nupapa”: I had not seen any of your prior posts.
Are you a New Papa?
Would that explain your profile picture .... screaming with body armor?
Germany is 6 hours later than EST.
So: if stock market opens here at 9;30 am EST, it is 3:30 pm in Germany ,,,, at which time some of their stock exchanges are still open?
So they can react “on the spot” to info that comes out prior to stock market opening EST, I believe.
However, if news comes out in the USA after market closes (EST) .... then German stock exchange would have first opportunity to react and trade on such news, before USA.
Correct?
Too? FYI: too = in addition, or “also”. Is too the same as also?
To is a preposition with several meanings, including “toward” and “until.”
Too is an adverb that can mean “excessively” or “also.”
Just to be clear: two is pronounced the same as to and too, but it can't be used instead of either of them because it's a number.
you wrote:
you wrote:
In regards to your post (copied below), I agree with a lot of it.
However, based on the recent podcast, we learned (IMO) that GG is anticipating the revenues to be approximately as follows (or better):
1) Leasing & selling of equipment: 20% x $10 Million = $2 Million
2) Product + Licensing (ie fluid sales + health care): 40% x $10 M = $4 Million
3) Agriculture + Oil & Gas: 40% x $10 M = $4 Million
Based on the above, I believe that if the actual results for 2021 come in at the $10M Revenue Projection, that the "guidance is primarily going to be met by O&G developments" ... it will be a good chunk of the revenues, but still "just" 40% once combines with Agriculture. Of course GG also is optimistic that the O&G revenues could deliver a big surprise to the upside.
However, the revenues from distributors should be substantial too (contrary to what Snow implies). My guestimate for 2020 is around $1.9 to $2.4 Million for "Product", plus $300K to $400K for Licensing. So a total of $2.2 to $2.8 Million. Per the above, it appears that GG expects this should comfortably increase to $4 Million (combined). So this would be 43% to 82% growth in this combined category.
Note: Level 3 distributors can also be involved in the "Leasing & Selling of Equipment" ... so the distributors will likely be contributing to PCTL in this manner as well in the years to come. Perhaps more likely now that newly designed series 2 equipment is about ready to ship. As GG mentioned, he sees a need for millions in financing to manufacture the amount of equipment to meet the large demand for equipment.
Note 2: in regards to the Maverick contract for 1 million gallons, it has been suggested that this could represent a $5 Million transaction ... IF this would be correct, then perhaps $1 Million could be anticipated to hit the 2020 Revenues, and the remaining $4 Million to hit the 2021 revenues. In other words, this 1 contract alone could hit GG projection of 40% of revenues AG + O/G ... so any/all additional sales in these industries would be the possible UPSIDE potential.
How far out is the expiration date on the bottom of your eOn mist spray?
I suspect that the product stays effective quite long, as it does not get exposed to air, like the bottles & jugs & totes of HOCl do.
I notice on a gallon jug of HOCl that the chlorine smell ... which is not strong, but noticeable, is diminished after say a month.
I have not tried the eOn mist yet ... does it have a noticeable smell? Does the smell remain of equal strength after 30, 60, 90 days?
For those who keep a can of eOn mist in their cars ... I wonder if the effectiveness of the product diminishes if the can is exposed to very high or very low temperatures in the car (as opposed to keeping it around room temperature)?
Sorry to hear you got the Rona.
Get better soon ... I know you are undoubtedly tryn2.
My condolences for your loss, Marzan.
I thought it was a good podcast. See my post 149038.
I would rather receive more info than less info.
Lots of good info was included.
I still believe that the podcasts often contain certain nuggets of info (or clues).
During the most recent podcast we learned:
GG's best guess at distribution of revenues, with new category of Agriculture + Oil/Gas totaling 40% of 2021 estimated revenues.
New possible Oil & Gas company in Fort Scott, Kansas doing a 1st major field test this week.
Revenue "guidance" for 2020 Q4: might be a bit lower than anticipated, so it appears we may not hit the $4 Million full year revenues ... not what most of us wanted to hear, but if this is the case it will come to light sooner or later. (did he say November was up 65%? versus which number?)
They anticipate adding additional distributors, but vetting to include whether they have already been in related business such as SanJan (Sanitation & Janitorial) ... which should get them up & running quicker than starting from scratch.
Personnel being added, including sales consultants and an Oil & Gas consultant. "The demand is there". Adding Sheldon Smith as CFO ... I look forward to being able to contact him with various financial questions I have, once he gets his feet wet for a while.
We are already looking at a Run Rate that should get us to $10 Million for 2021 annual revenues.
2021 Revenues could go substantially higher, depending on how fast (and how big) they can break into earning new revenues from O&G industry.
Also will depend on growth of Distributors.
(and per earlier part of the podcast: much higher revenues from equipment is anticipated)
Even though PCTL has established a good footprint in fluid sales & healthcare .... "97% of the market remains untapped".
The impact on revenues from Agriculture & Oil/Gas represents a possible immense upside for PCTL gross revenues.
Level 2 equipment is being deployed this month. IMO, equipment leasing/sales have been slow, and I am hopeful this new equipment will start to generate substantially higher revenues (need to finance Millions in order to build equipment fast enough to satisfy demand). The equipment is continually improving due to the R&D being performed.
Financing: GG admitted that financing was a big handicap in 2020.
versus
"it is still an issue" that is being addressed in 2021. But: they now have "good cash flow" and they are working on "good financing" which was never available to them in the past.
IMO: the riddance of the toxic debt (and the potential dilution it would have caused) is a great first step towards improving financial statements.
So: my conclusion is that GG conveyed quite a bit of info that was useful to hear/learn from.
It may have been hard to try to convey a bunch of the above nuggets of info in press releases.
Yes, questions still remain (and shareholders can of course still make their own inquiries ... some things will likely not be disclosed until they are ready or feel the time is right ... for example they likely cannot say much more about the up-tier to OTCQB until it happens).
I too am hoping that NWBO was able to get the german tax issue resolved, for a fraction of what the original amount may have been.
The offer from the german tax authorities to settle appeared to involve a total of around $3.2 Million including the withholding tax of $2.6M ... but supposedly NWBO could make a request for refund of the $2.6M ... not sure how long it would take to receive the refund. These amounts that are mentioned appear to be significantly less than the original amounts requested, so hopefully NWBO can get it settled for the above ... or less. The deadline for the above offer appear to have expired yesterday ... I wonder if they got something figured out.
Of course if the value of NWBO as a company were to increase 10-fold from here, then it would be "easier" for NWBO to make payment after a positive TLD and/or M&A (or JV etc) announcement, as compared to shelling out funds now. Perhaps they could make an agreement on a total amount and pay in a number of installments.
Of course to have to make any payment at all seems like it "hurts" since the "deemed “profit margin” never existed, and the deemed “dividend” also never existed ".
January 14, 2021 (instead of 2020)
you wrote:
You actually had a good question, as to whether the 10Q made mention of "potential publication", since only a portion of the section was quoted. This is a more complete quote from the 10Q:
I get the impression that recent science has brought to light that cancer cells enter a reversible drug-tolerant persister (DTP) state to evade death from chemotherapy.
It is being explained that it is similar to bears going into hibernation.
In this lower activity state, the cancer can just kind of hang out & wait out the onslaught of drug therapies it is being attacked with, and once the drug therapy is done ... then the cancer can go right back to multiplying again.
So in the case of GBM, I wonder if during the chemo and radiation phase ... some remnants of the tumor cells that remain after the surgery “can go dormant” for a while, and then start to reestablish themselves upon disease recurrence?
But perhaps under the right circumstances DCVax can overcome this problem by teaching the immune system to be on the lookout for these remnants and put them under attack even after the drug dosing has long been completed.
Note: I have no medical background, but I just saw the below very recent research results and was wondering how it might also be applicable to GBM.
And also ... whether it may be applicable to my friend, who was diagnosed with a very rare cancer: cardiac angiosarcoma (which has spread to other locations already). His outlook is unfavorable with SOC treatments, and he has entered a clinical trial with 2 immunotherapy drugs, in addition to chemo. No placebo’s in this trial. He has already received his first dosing of the 2 immunotherapy drugs about 3 weeks ago, and the imaging appears to indicate some reduction of the remaining tumors. Just a few days ago he also received first dose of chemo.
http://www.uhnresearch.ca/news/surviving-test-time
Surviving the Test of Time
Cancer cells are able to survive chemotherapy and targeted agents by entering a dormant state.
Cancer cells are notorious for growing rapidly, but have adopted a strategy to slow down growth and essentially ‘pause’ during chemotherapy in order to survive.
All living things have a tendency to develop their own way of surviving in an unfavourable environment. Cancer cells are no different when they are faced with cancer-fighting drugs.
A new study, led by clinician and Scientist Dr. Catherine O’Brien at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, shows that cancer cells become dormant and enter a ‘drug tolerant persister (DTP)’ state when exposed to anticancer therapies such as chemotherapy and targeted agents.
While DTPs have been shown to exist in several cancers, there is little understanding of the mechanisms that drive this state in response to chemotherapy and targeted therapies.
To further characterize the DTP state in cancer cells, the research team developed experimental models of colon cancer. “When treated with chemotherapy, we found that all cells within the tumour were capable of entering a DTP state and that this phenomenon was not limited to a subpopulation of cells,” explains Dr. O’Brien. “Once treatment ended, the cells began growing again.”
The researchers were interested in examining which biological mechanisms were responsible for driving this response. Using high-throughput genetic sequencing technologies, they found that during the DTP state, cancer cells displayed gene expression profiles similar to what certain animals use during development when faced with unsuitable environmental conditions, called diapause. During diapause, development and growth of an embryo is suspended until the threat is removed.
The authors also found that slow-growing DTP cancer cells are functionally similar to embryos in diapause where both are dependent on a cellular mechanism called autophagy—a process by which cells self-digest themselves during periods of starvation in order to survive.
They went further, showing that by treating tumours with inhibitors of autophagy, cancer cells were less likely to enter the DTP state and escape chemotherapy.
“Here we demonstrate for the first time how cancer cells have adopted an evolutionary-conserved mechanism to survive cancer treatment,” says Dr. O’Brien. “New therapeutic strategies that target cancer cells in the DTP state, or hamper the ability of the cells to enter this slow-cycling state, will be essential for addressing treatment failure and relapse of this devastating disease.”
This work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Terry Fox Research Institute, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and The Princess Margaret Cancer Foundation. M Ramalho-Santos holds a Canada 150 Research Chair in Developmental Epigenetics, TJ Pugh holds a Tier 2 Canada Research Chair in Translational Genomics, B Haibe-Kains holds a Tier 2 Canada Research Chair in Pharmacogenomics and CA O’Brien holds a Tier 2 Canada Research Chair in Translational Research in Colorectal Cancer.
Rehman SK, Haynes J, Collignon E, Brown KR, Wang Y, Nixon AML, Bruce JP, Wintersinger JA, Mer AS, Lo EBL, Leung C, Lima-Fernandes E, Pedley NM, Soares F, McGibbon S, He HH, Pollet A, Pugh TJ, Haibe-Kains B, Morris Q, Ramalho-Santos M, Goyal S, Moffat J, O'Brien CA. Colorectal cancer cells enter a diapause-like DTP state to survive chemotherapy. Cell. 2021 Jan 7. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.11.018