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.
That was my take, as well. Hopefully, this will get the ball rolling on Phase I approval.
Any speculation as to why that announcement had no impact on either volume or stock price?
Let's get on NASDAQ, let a couple of quarters go by and then see how we're doing. It's impossible to predict end of year price at this point. Patience.
So, after all your questions that I told you were not relevant, did you buy shares of the stock?
The apparent earnings/share goes up 10x after the reverse split. I know it's the same amount of money, but earnings is what counts (and share price and being listed) when it comes to institutional investors buying in. I've made my most money in stocks with low share counts. Doesn't take as much for them to move and for people who get bored holding stocks that move in tenths of a penny the reverse is a good thing.
As a health care provider and having worked at the FDA for 10 years I can tell you that you are wildly off with your claims. I'm not sure what your purpose is on this board other than to be a generator of false information. You are now on ignore.
> It appears that this Charles River announcement is a PR stunt
> with zero consequences in the real word just like the rat kit a
> year ago.
And you know that how? Have you called the CEO of HEMA and asked what the financial implications are of the China deal with Charles River? From the recent press release:
"Vital River will offer HemaCare’s full line of high-quality human primary cells and tissues to researchers in China. Vital River currently provides products to a vast number of scientists focused on benchtop research and drug discovery.
“We are excited to continue expanding our relationship with Charles River and partner with their Vital River subsidiary to continue to strengthen and expand our global presence,” said Pete van der Wal, President and CEO of HemaCare. “China represents a tremendous market for us, and Vital River, as the leading provider of tools and services for biopharmaceutical research in China, is the ideal partner to further drive our growth in this exciting, rapidly growing market.”
It's great that HEMA was able to team up with Charles River to compete with AllCells in China. It would be interesting to know how the medical research community views one company's products and services versus the other.
Here's what makes HEMA special:
Read the section, especially, on the comment from the SVP at Charles River and the reason for HEMA's increasing number of partnerships with Charles River (if you don't know about Charles River you may want to look them up - ticker- CRL) :
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/hemacare-charles-river-laboratories-partner-121000606.html
1. They do not have a massive number of shares. Read the quarterly report that was just issued to have your share questions answered.
2. They are a rapidly growing company in a new, greatly expanded facility. My guess is that they would rather see the money go towards their business than the SEC.
3. Would you ask why can't any hospital create the highest quality cancer treatment center in the world? It is difficult to do what they did. They have a huge database of paid donors, top scientists, extraordinary quality control and excellent management. They have also been highly innovative. Most companies stay within their niche. HemaCare went way outside their box to become one of the best in what they do.
"China represents an additional 1.4 billion potential customers"
Could you please explain what you mean by that statement? HemaCare products are used by people conducting medical research in pursuit of drug development or for basic science research purposes.
One doesn't fill a body of water. One fills a hole in the ground. Problem here is that they keep making a deeper hole and the filling of that hole with water is unending. The fish don't get to grow.
I bought my shares in March 2017.
Smoke and mirrors like the after-hours announcement today of a new $1.9M order and $28.2M in backlog. I'm doing extraordinarily well thanks to their "smoke and mirrors". I expect to do even better in the upcoming years. Are you shorting the stock or are you holding shares you bought a while ago at a much higher price?
The CEO is looking for a buyout. That is what will happen. The current share price is only meaningful in that it will get us bought at a higher price. I'm going to predict a buyout price of .50 by the end of 2020.
The company needs to stay in business for anything magical to happen. They must show efficacy over the long term with minimum morbidity. They have yet to do that and it has to be done with many animals. That is what is keeping the stock price where it is (independent of the RS; that just accelerated the fall in price, at least for now).
They are executing the best of a variety of bad choices. One has the same investment as before with fewer outstanding shares. FONR did a reverse split and while it took a few years, it skyrocketed (after I sold it, of course). A RS is not a death sentence. It may mean that is what it will take for RDGL to survive. As for the shareholders who wonder why, if they have such an amazing cure, money isn't pouring into the company from investors, it's because the number of treated animals is tiny and there are no long-term morbidity and survival outcomes. If they can treat a large cohort of animals and show survival rates with a good quality of life that would entice clients to pay for the gel to treat their pets, we will have a winner. But we're not even close to being there yet hence our current situation.
My apologies. I indeed misread. Forty cents by the end of 2019 is very much a possibility.
We have a lot of shares at the offer with people willing to sell at the bid. Forty cents by the end of the month seems unlikely. Would be glad to be wrong.
"Kevin is focusing on building the active continuous optimization business under Voosh and will be doing so for the next while."
Translation:
"Kevin is focusing [as opposed to actually doing something] on starting [starting!] on building the active continuous optimization business under his privately held company, Voosh, and will be doing so for the yet another 10 years."
As soon as ABHI stopped trading it was over. My stupidest stock purchase in almost 40 years and I held onto until the end thinking it could turn around. My back was slapped with one hand and my pocket picked with the other. My greed and fear of possibly losing out on a huge gain blinded me to the obvious reality of what was going to happen a year before the company went under.
Not sure what you mean by wiping it from your account. I will write ABHI down to zero on my taxes and in the HIGHLY unlikely event it comes back to life and one day I sell it my purchase price will be zero.
I hope you're joking.
Those photos are absolutely meaningless at this point in terms of drawing any kind of conclusion re: the efficacy of the treatment. Let's see how the dog does over time.
Cancer cure? It's a healing wound, post radiation treatment.
Drug approval for humans could get this stock to $3 - 5. The start of clinical trials perhaps to 20 cents.
Since you are "technically speaking," how did you gain your expertise? Are you an oncologist? Medical researcher? Radiologist who specializes in cancer treatment?
It looks like it but we don't know for sure. A market maker displays their lowest offer at any given moment. For all we know there are millions of shares behind that offer in the hands of that market maker once the lower offer gets taken out.
I'll just reply with a generic response - go read up on clinical trials of oncology drugs. You couldn't be more incorrect. I own RDGL. I want it to go up a lot, too. But could we dispense with the hype and misinformation.
Yeah, that was a huge mistake. I believed what the CEO had to say. It was a great story but unfortunately not true. I've made a ton of money on other under .25 stocks so I'm way ahead of where I started. Let me know if every stock you've ever picked was a winner and I'll start subscribing to your newsletter.
It doesn't mean cure if the tumor recurs at that site or elsewhere in the body. Hopefully, it is a cure. My only point is at this time we don't know if it is a cure or not and neither does Vivos or they would be touting IsoPet as a cure and they are not doing that-- for good reason. There is not enough data (in the form of patients and time) to know that. The distinction between "cure" and "treatment" is an important one. As has been pointed out, I can treat you for various diseases to mitigate their symptoms and give you more years but that is not a cure. Is it great that I can treat you and give you a higher quality of life and potentially extend your life? You bet.
I'll stop beating this horse that was dead starting from the beginning of the post touting IsoPet/Radiogel as a cure.
And you my friend, are medically and scientifically ignorant. They waited an entire month! There you go, that definitely is indicative of a cure. Having worked at the FDA at the Center for Veterinary Medicine for 10 years I can tell you that evidence for a cure, at this time, is woefully inadequate. As a treatment, fine. But to hear people on this board, who have no clue, talk about a cure when even Vivos won't use that word is preposterous.
"What would be a cure a shot you get when you are born that makes you immune to all cancers?"
That would not be a cure, either. It would be a vaccine to prevent cancer.
"The term "cure" means that, after medical treatment, the patient no longer has that particular condition anymore, as in Isopet/RadioGel. "
Yes, I learned that in medical school. That's my point. There have been no long-term clinical trials in animals to determine if IsoPet is a cure versus if it knocks down the tumor to extend the life of the animal, which is great, but that's different than a cure.
As of this moment IsoPet is a treatment not a cure.
Yes, he could sell it. A good point. As for another company, isn't he resurrecting Voosh? Given his unfortunate lack of success with his software over the years I don't expect a different result with any new venture. If the software was so great, I'd think it would be selling itself. Supposedly, Kaseya had great interest. That prospect has disappeared into the ethers.
Thought I'd check in to see what's new. Nothing, unfortunately and not unexpectedly.
He has no money or at least the shell (or the ghost of what was ABHI) has no money. I doubt any law firm would take on a class action lawsuit given the almost zero return even if the case was won.
It is not a proven cancer cure. There are not enough animals treated and we won't know if it's a cure until years after treatment of those animals. Vivos doesn't ever say it's a cure. It's a treatment. In time we'll know if it's a cure.
I think it sounds like a start-up biotech company. With a good chance of bringing in revenue from the sale of IsoPet and possible influx of cash from rx companies to support human testing of Radiogel they are in a better position than most. Having said that, IsoPet must prove successful when put to the test in a soon to be much larger cohort of felines and canines if the company is to remain solvent.
I hope so. Had a stock that I bought 2.125M shares of at .005 go to .0029. Held it for a while. So when it went up to .0035 sold a million shares and broke even on those and sold 900K more shares at .0077. Still have the other shares. In 3 days it went to .02. Bummer. Let's see that happen with CGUD.
I'd be curious to know how you came up with $10/share.