US Stem Cell Inc (USRM)

[Dragon Lady]

"we would be training a lot more on the Nasdaq."?? The company, today, does not meet the minimum requirements to be listed on the NASDAQ?
(must mean "TRADING", not "training" on NASDAQ), in any event, the company does not meet the minimum requirements today, to be traded on the NASDAQ.

http://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsroom/securities/b/securities/archive/2012/04/27/new-nasdaq-2-3-initial-price-listing-standards.aspx

The "reported revenues" for Q-1, 2014 were off-set by a huge increase in their cost structure, resulting in a larger operational loss in Q-1, 2014 than in Q-1, 2103 (yr over yr). The "revenue" made no difference essentially, to their dire financial situation.

Latest 10Q, PAGE 5:

Revenue in Q-1 2014 was 322,572 - 94,446 (cost of sale) = gross revenue/income of $228,126.

SG&A (sales/marketing, general and admin.) expenses for Q1, 2014 and Q1, 2013 were:
Marketing, general and administrative expenses:
Q1 2014: 838,329
Q1 2013: 370,533

Thus costs/expenses increased by 838,329 - 370,533 = 467,796 or more than twice the gross "revenues". ALL THE REVENUE IN THE WORLD, does not matter, if your expenses/costs outpace and grow faster than the revenue. There are many, many, many companies with $1 BILLION or more in "revenue", but they can't make a "profit" or a net income to save their lives and thus are teetering on BK.

So, COSTS/expenses more than doubled from 370,533 to 838,329, off-setting any effect of "revenues" increasing by the approx. $228,126.

This resulted in an operational loss for Q-1, 2104, that was greater than the same period 1 yr ago:
Net loss from operations Q1 2014:(620,923)
Net loss from operations Q1 2013: (531,084)

(parenthesis equals a "loss", thus 620,923 is a larger loss, than same period 1 yr ago)

Despite a huge increase in their cost/expenses for SG&A, their "R&D" expense line/spending essentially collapsed to near nothing, in the same period, barley $10K for the entire Qtr.
Research and development Q1, 2014: 9,857
Research and development Q1, 2013: 163,974

A collapse in R&D spending, is never a "good thing" for a medical/bio-tech "research and development" based company, IMO, especially one, supposedly trying to conduct phase II/III level "research trials". Companies in the biotech, pharma, and high tech arenas thrive on their R&D spending; most boast when they can increase R&D spending, to increase the chance at new products and filling their "pipelines", let alone completing the "R&D" trials and similar, already underway.

Nothing "got better" financially, IMO.