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’s EXACTLY the way I approached it. Got CRUSHED by the R/S: so much for my steady efforts at averaging down…
I wish it were all a joke or in jest—or just a bad dream. Unfortunately, it isn’t. But if you detect any factual inaccuracies in what I write, please do correct me. I don’t anticipate much on that count…
I have always believed in the value of their SCIENCE—it’s the BUSINESS side of the house that has underperformed miserably, in my view. When you have principally-engaged professionals talking extensively about efficacy on social media—but then see what we witnessed here—there are only so many possibilities, and here are a few: (1) those individuals exaggerated their claims (but why would they do so knowingly, given that their professional reputations are on the line?—doesn’t seem likely), (2) the market didn’t (and still doesn’t) see the lucrative value that the company claims is there (perhaps a clear and compelling business plan that showed specific revenue streams, time to value, etc. might have been helpful here? Call me crazy!), and (3) the coordination of ALIGNED ACTIVITIES and messaging—internally (between the scientists and the business managers) and externally (between the company and its investors and other stakeholders) was woefully inadequate and poorly planned and/or executed.
The free-fall from .07 to .0002 started (and for the most point ended/settled) LONG before the pandemic—we’re talking mid-2018 to late 2019…
So we have all this “IP”—some of which has been in “commercialization” for over 2 years (CaverStem). Where’s the shareholder value, where are the REVENUES? “Where’s the beef?”
I’m an insanely observant and detailed person: the absence of those letters jumped off the PAGE at me
TDA no longer shows this one as “CE”=Caveat Emptor. Is it coming BACK to open trading?
Where was this kind of activity 3 years ago when Gershman and Said were all over social media talking about how effective CaverStem was?
What alternative explanation do you have for PPS that went from .002 to .07 to .0002 and a 1:150 R/S?
Hope springs eternal. I remember thinking the same thing in advance of a urology conference in 2018 (and nothing visible came from that).
A science-first company FOR SURE...
I’m not selling—want to buy MORE
Where can one buy shares now? TDA (my service) is no longer allowing purchases. WTF...
If they try that in the digital age, they’re not likely to survive trying to run from their past
A solid week—for those who aren’t laboring under a 1:150 factor on their shares. For me personally my already-averaged-down breakeven PPS, considering the R/S, is $4.50. I hope you understand, therefore, why I’m not scheduling any parades just yet...
This is AWESOME news—in theory. However, I must again (and always) return to the PRACTICAL: when will we see these professional associations, product developments, and commercializations translate into even a FRACTION of the market cap that all of this SUGGESTS (Dr. Henry, a cardiologist, joined more than 2 years ago; Dr. Patel has been here for pretty much the duration; more recently we added Dr. Du)? As an investor in CELZ (I presume), you are hopefully wondering—and asking—these same questions. I want NOTHING more than for this to explode into the beast I thought it was when I first invested in early 2018. However, I’ve not seen that yet...
What do you mean “everyone”—some new OTC rule? I thought the “dark” designation could be done (just with some stigma no doubt)??
As of today, DOWN 16.7% (.025/.03) and more than tenfold INCREASE in OS since R/S.
I have no idea what that means: they told us 3 YEARS AGO that they were a “commercial-stage company”—so where’s the commerce (beyond what an enterprising kid could make, say, cutting lawns)?
Their numbers were in the toilet LONG before COVID—but nice try...
Monopoly Money PAPER gains that are largely the result of 150X increase in the PPS following Feb 2020 1:150 R/S. They finally admitted it: their “cash cow” is a laughable syringe kit—wow, what potential for monetization there. Even so, 3+ years into “commercialization” of CaverStem=14 sites/doctors WORLDWIDE. Why am I no longer shocked?
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1187953/000147793221003351/celz_10q.htm
As I have said for some time now, only 2 options present themselves as logical: the actual insignificance of the science, or the utter incompetence of the business “minds” at the helm. Absent one (or both of these value-killers), selling CaverStem to docs (and possibly also to a big pharm suitor) would be a virtual no-brained (for the reasons you suggest)—and “selling” it to the market would likewise ALREADY have resulted in parabolic (and fairly permanent) upward positioning of the PPS. Given that none of this HAS occurred (during 2-3 years of CaverStem “commercialization”), what else are we left to surmise?
What are the indicators of this? I’ve heard folks claiming that for 3 years...
They don’t tend to answer—trust me. They believe that shareholders should be treated like mushrooms: keep them in the dark and feed them a bunch of $h!t
I understand that all that COULD be inferred from what was written—but after 3 years of inertia, indecision, and ineffectiveness, I’m not interested in any more of their sleight-of-hand and subterfuge. Point of logic: if what they have is worth a FRACTION of what they must suppose that it is, the PPS would be going bonkers (and would have been for the last 1-3 years). However, very far from that being the reality, CELZ isn’t even mentioned as a speck-of-dust-sized insignificant non-entity in any real discussion of the true movers and makers in the stem cell industry: doesn’t that strike you as even the slightest bit odd?
+1. Imagine how the folks who paid .01-.05 much earlier—and then held believing that this was truly making-term investment (3 years seems like plenty of time to at least BEGIN seeing demonstrable upward PPS trajectory for a company that claims to have been engaging in “commercialization” of its product lines for almost that entire period)—imagine how THEY feel with 150X fewer shares and no STILL no meaningful movement up...
Once again, not specific timelines, no specific targets, no specific NADA. As if their USUAL MO (where they are just very vague in their OWN voice), now they get to add the extra dimension of 3rd-party attribution. How cute and convenient. And yes—I understand why, in general, they would want to be quite careful in what they say (for various reasons related to, among other factors, competitive advantage)—but they SURELY could have done better than this: for example, we are not told WHEN the correspondence was received, anything about the SCOPE of the feedback in relation to the company’s original approach(es), and nothing WHATSOEVER about potential timelines going forward (even in the vaguest form). Bravo!
CAVEAT EMPTOR
If patience is indeed in order here, I AGAIN pose a critical (and as yet unanswered) question: why were principally involved individuals broadcasting information about CaverStem’s alleged efficacy rates for more than a year prior to the publication of the trial data? Moreover, if that data really tells the story that the company THINKS it does, then why has the PPS tanked? These are fundamental, logical, and unavoidable realities and questions...
Not true AT ALL. 3 years ago, in May 2018, I sent several messages to Donald offering general encouragement, some perspectives from outside the organization, and an offer to assist wherever/however possible on a volunteer basis as a subscribed and engaged shareholder. I received no acknowledgment or reply to any of these messages (so why do they publish executive email addresses if they don’t intend to read and respond—in however brief and innocuous a form—to messages sent, particularly by obviously engaged shareholders?). Below is one such message that made clear my positive posture with respect to this company (at least to anyone capable of reading the spirit and the substance of such communications):
Dear Sir:
I will keep this message brief, as I understand that you have received numerous other communications from gravely concerned shareholders like myself.
Today we witnessed the most flagrant instance in recent memory of a horrific pattern of manipulation inflicted on the CELZ stock: at its lowest point during trading today, the value of our shares had fallen approximately 50% from the highs seen just a few days ago.
These wild and unexpected gyrations of price – – particularly recent precipitous downward swings, despite positive news regarding the company’s recent activities – – are the result of calculating and coordinated efforts by stock manipulators.
These unscrupulous traders are doing to CELZ stock what they did to RXMD shares fairly recently – –that is until RXMD leadership and legal counsel placed the manipulators on notice that they were aware of exactly what was taking place and would allow it to occur with impunity no longer.
As the stewards of stockholders’ equity and financial investment, it is critical that you be made aware of these efforts to devalue the financial worth and public profile of the company that you all are so admirably building. I respectfully request that you oversee a detailed, timely, and complete audit of all trading activities conducted in the last 10 days, to include the nature of the trades, the persons involved, and the timing of various maneuvers intended to deflate the shares’ price artificially so that the manipulators can profit handsomely off the havoc they’ve unscrupulously wrought against CELZ and its shareholders.
Please ensure that your legal counsel takes all due and necessary steps to advise any and all appropriate exchanges and governing bodies regarding these issues so that they may, in turn, conduct their own diligent and thoroughgoing inquiries. In addition, I respectfully request a brief reply from your shareholder relations personnel acknowledging receipt of this message.
Best regards,
That is MEANINGLESS: if a half-baked website generated substantial and sustainable market cap, every high school kid would be a millionaire
WTF ever—we’ve been waiting with baited breath for 3 years (which is RIDICULOUS for an OTC that aspires to be uplisted. They are SPENT
Some said they saw “blspd” somewhere. That’s what I’m basing it on
How bad do you expect R/S to be?
While neat (if true), this has nothing to do with CELZ directly.
While it is true that the pre R/S value (.0002) is roughly the same as today’s split-adjusted value (.0002233), how is that GOOD news in consideration of (1) the OS has ballooned again to over 1B when it was well under 100M pre-split, (2) the R/S clearly did little to increase the PPS (which we have determined is essentially unchanged) and (3) in consequence of (2) we suffered a reduction by 1:150 for no real gain in terms of PPS—meantime my ability to growth wealth with each organic increase of .0001 was obliterated. How is ANY of this good?! Lastly, let’s also recall that certain individuals who were principally involved with the company were on social media LONG before the R/S (back in early 2018) crowing about the efficacy of CaverStem—which drove the PPS up to .07–but it crashed to the aforementioned .0002 when the company failed to provide: (1) timely news on CaverStem’s efficacy by their inability to publish a long-anticipated paper for countless months (how does one reconcile this with the social media claims just referenced—either the claims were false or the company indolent, whether purposely or through inertia brought on by incompetence?), (2) a REAL plan to “commercialize” (their word) CaverStem (as opposed to the PATHETIC non-growth we have seen, with only a veritable handful of doctors WORLDWIDE offering this “landmark” procedure—which ought to sell ITSELF if it’s as effective as advertised), and finally (3) a clear, comprehensive, and compelling BUSINESS PLAN showing how they will translate IP into revenues (either what they have is worth nowhere near what they believe it is, or they are hopelessly incompetent at promotion and execution). The foregoing represents a large share of the CONTEXT attending your claim—and it contains unassailable facts. Please feel free to correct my argument in any place you can using empirical, explicit evidence to the contrary—that would only result in an increased strength through argumentative refinement. In the absence of such correctives, I’ll view it as sufficiently strong as written.
The only thing I’m “impatient” with is them hacking by haul of shares to bits by a 1:150 R/S during the SAME WEEK when they declared “we delivered” results to the shareholders: we are STILL waiting for the EVIDENCE of that claim in terms of PPS. Meantime, take the current PPS and divide by 150–that’s the REAL value from my specific situation.
Tim Warbington. Mr. CaverStem “Commercialization”—which has been an abject DISASTER. 3 years in—with a laughable number of sites providing the procedure worldwide (something dramatically less than 50 as I recall), and still no clear exposition of revenue streams or a coherent and comprehensive business plan. Yep—they “delivered” alright...
Yawn. That’s as good at generating revenue as CaverStem has been for the last 3 years: ZIPPO. “Commercialization”, “we delivered”. Lmao. Who’s driving the clown car these days—Tim or Don?