A final follow-up... This company has no business being public. It is a waste of shareholders' money. They will never attract the investment needed to list on a major exchange or do the clinical trials, given the enormous insider ownership stake. They need to either buy back the non-insider shares and go private, or list the shares on an OTC exchange. It's one or the other. If they won't do this, or at least contact every shareholder directly with some other reasonable alternative or viable plan, I would not be sad if someone decided to sue them for negligence and a host of other offenses. That would likely blow up the company -- and if it does, so be it. This thing has rapidly devolved into a research toy for one aging scientist, and a controllable supply chain for a couple other physician entrepreneurs. The 3000+ other investors are basically just pawns in the game, their money tied up infinitely, with no hope of liquidity or dividends. That has to end. And if it means melting down the company and selling off the pieces, I'd be fine with that, given the years of neglect and disrespect shown toward everyone but the insiders. I don't see why these folks should have their toys while the rest of us get to be mushrooms. Someone please sue them and end this charade. Thank you.

2024 10-K is out. Says nothing, as expected. There is no real hope here for legacy investors, short of a lawsuit.Whether anyone feels like throwing good money after bad is a separate question. I imagine they have considered that question and assumed the answer is no, else they would not be so openly dismissive of the interests of their 3000+ non-insider shareholders.

Re the $3 million, there's no way to know for sure. But if that Prodromos fellow really owns 800,000 shares, he must have invested something.It's possible that he did it to ensure primary access to the product supply -- a kind of vertical integration with his medical tourism business. But that's a total guess. Whatever the source, my fear is they are urinating away those funds quickly, having committed to a fairly robust burn rate a couple years ago with not a lot of revenue to support it. This can't go on indefinitely. I do expect some news from them reasonably soon, although I don't necessarily expect it to be good for legacy shareholders..What I'd love to hear at this point is that they are being acquired for $300 million, so that we can all walk away with a 10X ROI and stop thinking about it.

I don't know that a lawsuit makes any sense, I just wouldn't be surprised if certain former insiders and larger investors threaten one -- particularly given their weird plan earlier this year to do some kind of strange IPO hybrid that was obviously hatched in response to dissatisfaction from those people. Personally, I didn't think a lawsuit made any sense after the delisting, and I argued that point. They needed some time to come up with a plan. Which they did. Unfortunately, that plan involved Zamora, but that's water under the bridge. So they got a new plan, which involves becoming a legit biotech. And that's all fine. It took money and time, and that work is also done (restored to the good graces of the SEC, real inroads at the FDA, etc.). So then they needed money, and have tried multiple IPOs, all of which have failed. This is where the patience must necessarily come to an end, and they need to understand this. They are now 0 for at least 3 on IPO attempts.An IPO isn't going to happen. They need to relist the shares on an OTC market, and seek funding through other channels. The result will most likely be a horrible devaluation of the shares and the market value of the company. And we're all going to lose a lot of money unless we choose to hold onto the shares and see what happens. But that is better than blowing up the company with a lawsuit, which will produce nothing except some legal fees and some visceral satisfaction that they all got what they have now richly earned. But, personally, I'd rather have my shares trading on an OTC market. They've had their grace period. It's time to list the shares.

Well, it seems obvious that the latest IPO attempt has failed too, as it is well over a month old now and there is no sign of life. They will need to make a choice soon, or there will almost certainly be a lawsuit from disgruntled shareholders. One option for them is to go private -- which is probably the most appropriate option given the lopsided equity structure, and the apparently competing internal interests. But I imagine that would require $5-$10 million dollars, to reacquire the public shares. I for one am not selling my shares back to them at a loss. Another option, per recent messages, is to get acquired. Given their unique manufacturing platform, I'm not sure why that hasn't happened already, but who knows. The last option is to just relist the shares on an "elevated" OTC exchange, so that the shares can be traded. Which is what Dr. Musick said they would do four years ago, before he stepped down as CEO. I suspect this is the most likely path at this point because it is by far the easiest (there's nothing stopping them at this point -- they've done all the hard work), and it will head off any shareholder lawsuits. What it doesn't do is provide capital to do the clinical trials. Which is a problem. But that's not an "IPO or bust" situation -- there's no law against raising money without an IPO. The risk is that the share price plummets in the OTC world, and they end up having to dilute everyone into oblivion to raise funds. But my guess is that is inevitable either way, as nobody will want to touch this company as long as a few insiders own 90% of it.

The "FDA Approved" bit is referring to their approval to use AlloRx for emergency use during COVID. To your point about right to try, I don't know the details of the reg, but Imagine it applies when other options have been exhausted and/or when a patient's prognosis is grim. But I don't know. Either way, it's not a general strategy for a biotech business to hang its hat on.

On a related subject, I stumbled across a couple articles that mention the work that Dr. Chadwick Prodromos is doing with medical tourism in Antigua.This guy seems to be the real deal, with some prestigious academic credentials (Princeton, Johns Hopkins, etc.). He seems to be sold on AlloRx as a treatment for multiple ailments , including autism and polycystic ovary syndrome. It turns out that he also appears in the S-1 -- he owns over 800,000 shares of stock, with warrants for more. If these are post reverse split numbers, that means the guy owns roughly 20% of the company. If that's true, I think it probably accounts for most of the private capital infusions that we have been seeing. It also means that the vast majority of the company is owned by three individuals -- Musick, Zamora and Prodromos.

If that's true, then I think it explains a lot. If VB is basically controlled by three MD's with different interests and objectives (a scientist, a clinical researcher and a businessman impersonating a cosmetic surgeon), it's going to make it very difficult to attract capital for a small IPO that doesn't change the power dynamics. Furthermore, if I'm Podromos or Zamora, an IPO just gets in the way of their side businesses, which likely depend on VB prioritizing its limited manufacturing resources to medical tourism. If an IPO happens and domestic clinical trials start, then the company has to focus resources on that. And I imagine that this is Musick's goal.

If I'm correct, it is difficult to see how the legacy investors and minority insider shareholders survive this situation. I don't think an IPO to a major exchange can happen without another reverse stock split and a serious dilution event, which of course would begin the process of rendering the minority legacy shares next to worthless. It seems to me that we're probably better off with them continuing to expand the now-growing medical tourism business, with or without a listing on an OTC exchange, and hoping they are bought someday by a company with bigger pockets that sees the value.

Re binary event, there's a point where it's difficult to come up with any explanation for how they continue to find private funding to stumble along, but fail to find similar, relatively modest pots of cash needed to resume trading. All explanations seem farfetched to me. I imagine only a handful of people really know what is going on. The best I can come up with is the IPOs are failing because too much of the company is held by insiders. And, conversely, the private capital infusions are likely coming from insiders or friends/relatives of insiders -- making the problem of going public worse. But that's a wild guess.

While all that is happening, there's been nothing from the company regarding this success story:
https://www.kare11.com/article/sports/football/kirk-cousins-caribbean-stem-cell-treatment/89-3fe569a4-fbf0-46ef-acb6-ee106f03485a

Kirk Cousins is a successful quarterback who is having a great season, only 9 months after doing a treatment with VB's cells after an Achilles tear last fall. And VB seems to be publicly oblivious to this, like they don't want anyone to know. I mean, why would we want to publicize evidence that our product actually works???

News blackouts during certain periods are to be expected, as the SEC rules during IPO periods are very restrictive (understandably). But that doesn't account for a total absence of communication with shareholders since Dr. Musick stepped down as CEO four years ago. As I've said a number of times, the current CEO could be a cardboard cutout for all we know, as he has literally never addressed the shareholders. And I also don't understand why they have no media or social network presence. It makes no sense to me. If you need investment capital, why in the world would you want near-complete anonymity? You have to try pretty hard to be as invisible as this company is to the general public. I give them a lot of credit for navigating the fraught terrain between "murky supplier to the offshore medical tourism business" to "precipice of legit American biotech". Maybe radio silence was required to get this far, I don't know. But at some point you do need to communicate with shareholders.

@grandslam... We don't know either way. That's the problem. They don't talk to the shareholders anymore outside of the SEC filings (which are great to have, but don't explain what's really happening, or perhaps not happening). They've obviously had a lot of difficulty pricing their IPOs, since this is the third or fourth attempt at it, in addition to the one brief attempt to do a listing without the IPO. But we have no idea why. The IPOScoop site, which tends to have decent data, does not list it as "withdrawn" yet, so perhaps they are still trying. I do wonder if there are IP concerns in the investment world, as I have no idea if they have obtained actual patents on the critical technologies (those being, in my view, AlloRx itself, and parts of their manufacturing platform). Since they don't communicate with us, there is no way to know if that is an issue, and, if not, what the problem is.

Well, it's been almost three weeks since the latest S-1, and... nothing. I have to assume that the latest attempt at an IPO has failed just like the others. But, given this company's outstanding recent history of shareholder relations, who knows.... certainly not the shareholders.

Yeah, there weren't many COVID data points, though they actually did release the numbers on those cases in their various filings in the past year. Unfortunately, that all coincided with the Giostar thing, which I found unfortunate (there was a legit research physician involved, but the overall image of that company reeked of stem cell scam to me -- I'm glad it faded away). I was referring more to the offshore treatments they've been doing for years, servicing the medical tourism businesses in the Caymans and Bahamas. Interestingly enough, one of their patients was Kirk Cousins, who led the Falcons to a last-second win over the Eagles on Monday Night Football this week. He tore his Achilles last season, and had AlloRx treatments earlier this year to assist with his recovery. So if the Falcons end up in the Super Bowl, VB can claim all the credit ...JK. Seriously though, the safety data that I imagine influenced the FDA's decision to approve their clinical trials comes mostly from all those medical tourism cases. Those count for the purposes of getting a domestic trial approved, but not for much else.

Re the early trading dynamics if/when the IPO succeeds, I think we've discussed that a number of times as the months have turned into years. I'd expect a short-term drop, as people anxious to exit for literally years try to liquidate immediately. Whether there is some value-based demand after that is difficult to tell -- but, with a float this small, it only takes a few bullish quasi-insiders to absorb enough shares to create a tailwind. After that, it's entirely a function of how the clinical trials go. And I expect the initial results to be good, since it's basically about safety at that stage, and they have plenty of offshore data to expect little or no problem with that. Of course, if they see unexpected early efficacy on top of establishing safety, that's when things get really interesting. If I remember correctly, Mesoblast had a couple billion dollar valuation at one point (I could be wrong about that, but I know it topped a billion). Should that happen with VTRO, investors from the penny stock days would see something like a 5,000-6,000% ROI, not accounting for further dilution beyond all the outstanding notes and warrants, some of which is inevitable. I don't expect anything that good to happen, but it's possible -- it doesn't take too too much good news in the biotech world to create a billion dollar valuation.

FWIW, the SEC issued the "Notice of Effectiveness" for the S-1 / IPO. That means the offering is blessed as legit, and the company can go ahead and put the securities on the market. That sounds to me like the underwriters have secured the funding, and this will likely be happening soon (although I don't think the one thing is technically connected to the other). We shall see. But I wouldn't be surprised if the thing finally happens relatively soon.

Yeah, that's the mystery. Who is keeping things afloat and why? And if it's a real outside investor or investor group (vs. continuous insider injection of personal capital), what do they see that, apparently, nobody else sees? They clearly had some plan for what has happened financially, else they would not have restructured with new hires and an unsustainable burn rate a couple years ago. As I've been saying over and over, this is why I am so disappointed in the CEOs who have succeeded Dr. Musick. Zamora was clearly just manipulating the situation (at least as I see it as an outsider, extrapolating from info they have put in filings) -- so, in retrospect, his near total silence is explainable. But I expected more of Furman. To be fair, he immediately put the company on a fast track to renewed legitimacy with the SEC (and, presumably also helped out with the FDA, although I think that was Mosessian's primary gig). And to be more fair, their SEC filings have been comprehensive. But what we haven't seen at all is any kind of personal media or communication that lays out basic strategy. That's part of a CEO's job, along with manufacturing a public image. Back in the day, Dr. Musick would put together a complete summary every quarter or at least a couple times a year, which I appreciated. But, like Zamora, Furman has done none of that. Actually, he has done less, since Zamora actually did do a couple brief interviews early on before going silent. Again, I don't want to minimize the effort that went into reorganizing and getting to the precipice of being a legit biotech startup. But a few basic questions remain unanswered, and I think it's time to let the legacy shareholders know what is going on and when these clinical trials will begin.

The S-1 says that 4.5 million total shares exist now. I imagine that only about a million of those are truly held publicly (not by insiders). So that would be the approximate float now, if it were trading. The IPO will add roughly a million shares to that, so that would be two million. And then they imply that roughly 1.8 million shares will be created when all those notes and warrants that have been funding the company for the past few years are somehow (?) converted to shares. So the total float, assuming the IPO happens and all the other financial instruments convert, would probably be somewhere in the neighborhood of 4 million shares, maybe slightly less. It's a very small number for a public company. And it's the one faint hope for legacy investors, if some sort of tailwind should ever develop around the core business. With a float that small, any kind of broad-market demand for the shares will create serious upward pressure on the share price. On the bright side, they have at least done everything technically necessary to return to trading, and I certainly give them credit for that. Very few companies get delisted like they did and survive, let alone survive with their original shareholders mostly intact. It is very unusual. But until they execute an IPO or otherwise list the shares, it doesn't matter.

They amended the S-1 again. No time to read. There is a heavy-handed warning about spreading disinformation, and, at first glance, the whole note/warrant conversion thing seems off the table now. Which would make sense, as it could only scare away IPO investors. My guess is the two things are related, but who knows. No time to read it or worry about it anymore. Again, if the IPO actually happens, and the shares hold the $5-$6 IPO price, most speculators from the penny stock days will be somewhere between "whole" and "modestly ahead", depending on your average cost. From there it will be a weird battle between the very small float and the very small public awareness of the company -- no way to tell what wins. But, of course, none of it means anything unless the IPO actually executes. Which has been problematic so far. We'll see.

For the masochists among us, they updated their IPO filing with the SEC. I have neither the time nor interest to read it in detail. It's all obviously ongoing back and forth between balancing new IPO shares vs. note/warrant holders demanding liquidity, finding an investment bank that can make it all work (good luck...), choosing an exchange, etc., etc. This one does specify that resale shares can't be sold until the IPO succeeds. Which makes sense, since the company probably can't survive without the IPO funds.

In the end, there are buyers for the shares or there aren't. And until they start selling themselves through media and a professional communication strategy (I mean, for the love of god, please update your website pipeline to not reference 2023...), I don't know how they can expect anyone to be interested. Man, I'd sure love to be paid a CEO's salary and not have to answer a question from a shareholder, ever. Nice work if you can get it, Chris. I don't know what dream world these people are living in, but hopefully they'll surprise us all and snap out of it soon.

Re prior post, I decided to skim it quickly. It strikes me as a final shot at satisfying the company's pressing needs. (1) They need some money to start the clinical trials (without which, it’s game over and lights out), and, (2) based on this and prior filings, they apparently have a group of investors and former insiders who are pressing hard for a liquidity event. After the last IPO attempt failed, they were previously going to satisfy the latter by listing the shares and letting the market set a price. Apparently that plan failed, like everything else.they've tried. So now they're doing a two-pronged attack, where they do a bare minimum IPO to raise modest funding, and they let this privileged group of investors sell their stock separately (after some accounting gyrations to create the stock). The result, if it all works out, is a stock price of 5 or 6 bucks a share on the NYSE American. The elite group of prior investors presumably doesn't sue them (I imagine that’s in writing somewhere), and they raise 4 million or so to do the clinical trials.

The problem with all of these plans is that nobody has ever heard of this company, in large part because: they do no PR; the various CEOs have done no media or public appearances; and there is no buzz, and no awareness of what they even do. For any IPO or fundraising of any kind to work, there has to be awareness of what you do. This company has done nothing to create that awareness. They seem to expect that people will suddenly buy their shares because... well, I have no idea why they would expect that. My sense is that this plan will fail like all the others, due to lack of demand for the shares. But let's hope I'm wrong. This is the bare minimum offer they can execute that keeps most pink sheet investors whole while generating anything close to the cash they need to do the clinical trials. If this fails, I have to assume that it's game over.

Even if things go right, I do not expect any significant appreciation of the share price for a while, until (1) one or both clinical trials have encouraging Phase 1/2 results, and (2) the expected sell-off from the privileged investors is absorbed by the market. Good luck with the latter – I expect the SP to plunge initially, with a possible quick exile to the OTC markets. More specifically, it doesn’t say this specifically, but I suspect that Dr. Z will suddenly have a couple million fungible shares. And if you don’t think that dude will be cashing out ASAP, I have a bridge to sell you. If he can sell a couple million shares for a buck each, I imagine he would do that. But who knows -- this is speculation.

The only hope for longer-term, legacy investors (like me) is that the IPO actually succeeds and the clinical trials go exceptionally well. Given the very, very small float, any tailwind like this could, and probably would, send the share price to $20 or more based on pure speculation. My advice is to hope the IPO happens, prepare to ride out the inevitable sell-off from former insiders and their girlfriends and nieces, and hope that at least one of the two trials goes well. We will all make money if that happens, possibly a lot of money. But a lot has to go right. Honestly, I think the science end of it is a decent bet, as I think their underlying product proposition is solid and compelling. Whether they can convince the investment community to supply the capital to prove it is a much more tenuous proposition, particularly given their abysmal communication strategy (or total lack thereof).

https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=793171 Honestly, I don't have the time or inclination to read it. Wake me up when it's over.

@pcarew... Thanks for the info. Still at $0 in my Schwab account. There was an SEC filing this week that does suggest to me that something is happening. But I will believe it when I see it.

The quarterly report is out. It says the usual pile of nothingness wrapped in the the standard gobbledygook of warrants and convertible this or that. They still claim to be planning to start two clinical trials, but they have been saying this for a number of years now, so it doesn't mean anything. The only "news" of note is the sales of AlloRx for offshore treatments is picking up significantly, as demand for stem cell therapy picks up. If you missed it, an NFL quarterback (Kirk Cousins) was treated recently with AlloRx. So, who knows , maybe that business will grow and keep them afloat. "For whom and for what" is separate question, as the company seems on a 100-year path to nowhere, as though stockholders have the lifespans of biblical patriarchs.

@grandslam... There's nothing to talk about. Speculating about a company that says nothing to its shareholders and seems to do nothing but execute quarterly financing agreements to stay afloat is exhausting and, ultimately, pointless. I've never seen anything like this. Complete silence from a CEO??? The guy has never said a word, never addressed the shareholders. The clinical trials??? What clinical trials? They never started, as far as anyone knows. What does this company even do? Is it a front for something? Some sort of weird tax write-off? Why are they bothering to pay people? Is there any plan? Any strategy? Nobody knows. And I'm tried of thinking about it. It would be nice to recover my investment someday, but at this point I don't see how that could be possible. As I've said recently, this company should rename itself Seinfeld, Inc. -- because, as far as anyone can tell, it's about nothing. It's certainly not about shareholder value, which remains at... let me check... right... zero.

Aaaannnd... It's May. The crickets are getting very monotonous.

It seems like Furman's vision was to spin off the offshore stuff to Zamora and kill the nutraceutical boondoggle, focusing on becoming a legit biotech with real clinical trials (of course, we'll never know, since Furman might as well be a projection on a wall). Unfortunately, it appears that all he has done is create an unsustainable burn rate that funds accountants, with zero progress toward the only thing that matters in this strategy -- namely, doing the clinical trials. They seem to have no interest at all in explaining to shareholders what the hold-up on those is. Nor will they admit that they literally have zero chance of a valuation that would support a listing on a major exchange until they at least start them, rendering moot all the talk about creative ways to kickstart a NASDAQ listing. It's like 2+2 is supposed to equal 5 or something, and the world is supposed to accept that. None of this makes any sense. They've had a candidate cell therapy ready for testing for something like five years. It just doesn't add up.

Aaaannnnd... February is now April. Crickets. They should rename this company "Seinfeld Biopharma" -- a company about nothing.

Yes... LOL. A couple months ago it seemed evident that former insiders & investors were exerting some pressure to resume trading. But nothing ever seems to happen, other than occasional SEC filings that state some objective -- which then falls into the black hole that is their communications. Continued deafening silence from the CEO, and no updates on the only thing that really matters, which is if and when the clinical trials will ever start. So who knows. Are they just going to burn through another $3 million in darkness and silence, announcing nothing and filing required SEC documents? March will turn into April, which will become May and then June. And we'll be sitting in front of our computers asking the same questions. I suppose if those insiders and investors decide to blow it all up with lawyers, that could make a difference (though it would be the end of the road for most of us). It's not clear that the company has any intention to do anything real, unless forced to do so. They might not like to read that, but what do they expect when they don't communicate, outside of required boilerplate filings?

Yeah, it is crazy. You know, sometimes you just have to believe your lyin' eyes. When they announced the IPO at $17 million, I set up a spreadsheet with different scenarios, and tried mightily to figure out how they could make it work, considering listing requirements of a major exchange and the equity positions of Musick and Zamora. Ultimately, I just didn't see how the major investors needed for an IPO could stomach it, unless those two somehow sold into the IPO to reduce their control (which ultimately would have severely diluted legacy investors like us). But that was never going to happen. I think it might have worked if it was just Musick owing a plurality, as he is a scientist and this is his life's work. But the Zamora thing was clearly too much for rational investors to bear. I have no idea how the company allowed that to happen. All we really know is that the Furman regime took action, and subsequently stripped Zamora of direct control over his shares. I suspect they realized that they were never going to be taken seriously if they didn't do something. It's still not ideal. But anyway, yeah, one would hope the $3 million is enough for them to generate some results and establish some credibility.

@grandslam... It can be very confusing, and I don't have the time to detangle it all. It is important to distinguish "what we care about" -- by which I mean "total number of existing shares + total number of potential shares via options, notes and warrants" -- from the share counts discussed early in the latest filing. The latter is dealing specifically with shares that will be eligible for public trading if/when they go live on the NASDAQ. I'm not particularly concerned with that. Roughly speaking, I think what they are getting at is that most/all of the Musick and Zamora shares are not part of this, but a number of shares are being created via options, notes and warrants.

But, again, I'm not really concerned about, say, the daughter of a former CFO suddenly being able to trade 3,000 shares. I'm concerned about the total share count today and the total share count that will exist if all those options and warrants become shares. The share count is 4,430,535. As best I can tell without going crazy there are 1,681,077 additional shares that could be created. That number could be (probably is) wrong in certain respects, but I think it's a decent general gauge, insofar as 1.1 million of the 1.6 million are just stock options.

Bottom line: I think there are roughly 6,000,000 shares (4.4 million + 1.6 million) either in existence now or that will likely exist if the company survives. Of these, roughly 2 million will be tradeable on the NASDAQ, if and when the listing ever happens. Which reflects the fact that Musick and Zamore own two thirds of the company (which I think, more than anything, is why the IPO likely failed).

@grandslam... If I'm reading it correctly, there will be roughly another million shares added to the total from exercise of warrants, or shares issuable under prior agreements. Of the 2,179,344 shares in the filing, 1,224,183 shares already exist, leaving 955,161 in the "to be created" category. But it is very difficult to figure all that out in a 10 minute read, particularly in light of information later in the document where they delineate all of the various outstanding warrants and their respective exercise prices. I don't have the time -- or, frankly, the interest or expertise -- to figure all that out. All that really matters is that a return to trading is looking very likely in the next few months, if the NASDAQ approves their plan and a market develops. As I've said, I think the fate of the share price will then depend heavily on their moving forward with the clinical trials this year, as advertised. If bona fide trials are underway, there should be enough speculative interest to maintain a market for the shares for a while.

They files another S-1 with the SEC that seems to formalize their previously announced plans to enter the NASDAQ without an IPO, with pricing determined by the market -- all seemingly in response to a demand for liquidity by various influential shareholders. The only real "news" here, based a quick skim, is they are setting the baseline share price at $15, until trading commences and the market speaks. At $15/share, most investors from the penny stock days would likely see a gain of 200% - 500%, depending on when you bought. Which would be nice, if it held up. But I don't expect that to hold up initially, as I don't know where the demand will be coming from, given their apparent determination to remain utterly unknown in the marketplace. But you never know. They keep doubling down on the clinical trials starting this year. Should positive early results, or rumors of same, emerge, that could provide a tailwind later this year. But I will believe all of this when I see it.

@grandslam... It's discussed in some detail under "Risks Related to Ownership of our Common Stock", and also in a prior 8K. The more I think about it, the more I think it's a bad idea to relist on a major exchange, until and unless they generate some buzz with the clinical trials. If there is no demand for the stock, the price will plummet, even with the tiny float. There must be buyers. And if the price plummets, another delisting will occur, helping no one. If they are only doing this to appease shareholders who want some liquidity, but refuse to do the things necessary to create awareness of their business, it seems to me that a lower key listing on an OTC board would be more appropriate.

The 10K (Annual Report) is out. If nothing else, they are at least filing robust reports nowadays. No, we never get to talk to the CEO to ask questions, but at least the info exists. My takeaway from skimming it is that they are serious about re-entering the equity markets, they are ready to initiate the first two clinical trials, and they plan to build a second manufacturing facility. I don't think they have the funding to do that last one this year. It seems to me that they probably have the cash to do the clinical trials or the new facility, but not both. But who knows.

So, yeah, I think this is finally the year that the logjam breaks, on multiple fronts. That doesn't mean the results will be good. It could be the year that the equity officially becomes worthless. Or, who knows, the shares could be trading at $30 this fall with some favorable buzz. But I do think we'll finally be out of the black hole we entered in 2020.

@grandslam... it's in the SEC filing.

They replaced the CFO. Haas remains as a consultant for a time. Since we only have conjecture to lean on with these folks, one can only surmise that the failed IPO was the end of the road, and/or the recent agreement with large shareholders to obtain a NASDAQ listing through the back door involved a lot of inside pressure to try someone new. The new CFO is highly incentivized to get this done, although that can only go so far. One does wonder how they expect a market to suddenly emerge for the securities when they have done exactly zero public communications over the past couple years to generate awareness. I guess we'll see if the new CFO understands this basic fact of life, and maybe suggests to the CEO that maybe, who knows, it might be a good idea to actually, you know, say or do something in public. Stranger things have happened. There's a first time for everything.

Would it really kill this company to release a bleeping press release that outlines their plans for the funding they just acquired? Really. Just a one-page, simple little statement that says this or that clinical trial will begin on this or that date, and the schedule for others has been adjusted as follows. Is it really that hard? (Hint: It's not -- I've written plenty of them). I do not understand the silence. I really don't. They're acting like they want to be a private company, and yet they're spending money on things that only public companies need to do. This is perplexing. They seem to want to be invisible, while expecting the market to value them on ...what exactly?

They filed another 8-K today with the SEC, to document what appears to be the remaining $1,000,000 of the $3,000,000 they authorized last fall. Again, my assumption is this funding is in lieu of the failed IPO to (a) pay the bills for a year or two, and, presumably (b) to start one of the clinical trials. If all of that is true, I would expect them to announce the initiation of one of the trials with some public fanfare in Q1, while simultaneously trying to enter the NASDAQ through the back door, as previously discussed. I assume the theory is that the juice of initiating a clinical trial will provide the momentum to price the shares adequately. But who really knows. Until the apparently deaf and mute CEO addresses the shareholders, it is all conjecture.

@grandslam... It is promising to an extent. I think they have made a lot of good and correct moves over the past couple years, with one exception. The good news is the new people have put the company on the road to legitimacy, taking what Dr. Musick and his tiny staff did, in terms of developing a product and manufacturing technology, along with an offshore clinical treatment protocol, and turning it into a real company that is doing what is necessary with the SEC and establishing real inroads with the FDA. That's all great stuff. Where they have fallen down (IMO) is in their complete disregard for publicizing what they have done and are doing. Basically, no one is telling the story. Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one coming close -- on an obscure investment board that nobody reads.

I had a lot of hope when they made Zamora the CEO -- a young doctor with a potentially appealing media presence who could tell the story. But he didn't. Aside from one or two limited interviews, he did nothing. As far as anyone can tell, he's in it for him and his dermatology practice. The documentation they released to the SEC after removing him suggests that he milked things to his own benefit and did very little.The new CEO and CFO clearly understand the mechanics of public companies, which is good. But, again, they have done nothing to promote the company or just make it something worth investigating to potential investors. I know a good number of people who are serious investors, and none of them have ever heard of VB. That's on VB. It's like they are trying to remain under the radar -- and I could understand that in the days of mostly operating in offshore facilities trying to build a portfolio of safety and efficacy data. But they're past that now.

People don't throw money at unknown entities. If VB wants to be seen as $50-$250 million biotech startup, it needs to start telling the story. If they don't have anyone to tell the story, they should pay someone to do it. ThinkEquity certainly didn't. It sounds like they have hired another consultant. I'd love to talk to that person/company, and see what they have in mind. Because nobody associated with this company seems to understand that you'll never be taken seriously as an investment vehicle without some level of public awareness. The latest CEO has literally never even addressed the shareholders, let alone done any significant media. I don't know what they're thinking. Any attempt to re-enter the serious equity markets without someone or something blazing the awareness trail is going to fail. And I hope that the people who run the company understand this.

I read a little more of the most recent filing. It seems pretty obvious that some sort of deal was struck by some existing shareholders that would provide them liquidity, and this is somehow related to whomever just gave them $2 million. The latest S-1 specifically states "We are registering the shares of common stock in order to permit the selling stockholders to offer the shares for resale from time to time." The "selling stockholders" are listed by name, and include the former CFO John Evans. One would presume that a number of influential shareholders are tired of their shares being untradeable. Well, join the club, fellas... But who really knows. We'll just have to see how this plays out.

And so it is (i.e., symbol removed from Schwab listing). Hadn't noticed, or considered that the VTRO symbol was tied up with the IPO filing, which was tied to the AMEX. With that now officially dead, yes, they will need to refile the VTRO symbol with the NASDAQ. But I suspect we won't see it reappear in the Schwab listing until and unless the shares start trading. The only question now is what the market thinks the shares are worth. If it's north of $10/share (and a $40-50 million market cap), then we will be on the NASDAQ. If it's less than that, then we will have to see if they are willing to re-enter the OTC markets. The problem with that for them is that it will be harder to raise capital. We'll just have to see if demand materializes for the shares. And on that note, it sure as heck would help if they would start publicizing the technology, and if their CEO would come out of hiding. It's hard to generate interest in something that the public has never heard of.

As an aside, given the small number of shares post-split, the initial SP would almost certainly need to be north of $10/share. I can't see how they would meet the NASDAQ standard for market capitalization otherwise, if there is no demand for the shares at that price level. Whether they would consider an OTC listing if it fails is anyone's guess. I can't see why not, with the IPO off the table and some working capital in hand. The main downside to a listing is it will kill legacy investors if they have to raise money again and the public share price plummets. But hopefully it doesn't come to that. Conversely, if it does meet the NASDAQ threshold, most legacy investors will be in the black by a considerable margin, and those seeking to exit intact will have a window to do that. Not my strategy personally, but I'm sure there are a lot of folks out there that just want out.