The capital requirement for Nasdaq would require additional dilution at this time. I don't see Leo being in any hurry to dilute just to uplist. So, you may be correct about this being one possibility for the delay. He may be waiting for higher share prices which wouldn't require as much dilution and I'm fine with that since I'm in it for the long run. I may not agree with all, but, I'm comfortable overall with the way management has handled everything thus far. I'm in the camp of waiting is fine for whenever they want to implement their uplist plans. And, as some have said, uplisting too early can be a nightmare for early shareholders. Most newly uplisted biotechs are shorted. We may be ok due to the rich pipeline, but, uplisting could be rocky for the first year for those that watch the ticker daily. The only ones that need to be concerned about the daily price movements are those trading in and out. The overall trend is up after a long sideways range.
I think that's why so many were upset over Prurisol being delayed/pushed back after the company suddenly picked up the Polymedix assets instead of using the funds on Prurisol. Many wanted to trade out at the pop that didn't come. Instead, we traded sideways for a long time. Yet, in the long run, most will agree now that the Polymedix asset acquisition was a great move for the company and it's growth.
All is going well in CTIX land from my perspective. Leo wants to uplist and he'll do it on his own time.
In Reply to 'John B'
I agree. Based on the context on the web where the term "operating history" is used it most likely tied to revenue. It is surprising that the Nasdaq definitions and the "pedia's" of the web do not have a definition. It would be safest to conclude that they do not qualify for this part of the $2 shareprice requirement for Nasdaq uplist.
CTIX has raised enough cash via Aspire to meet the shareholder equity requirement of $4 million. So, I guess if they want to go to the Nasdaq bad enough, they could raise cash via Aspire to get net tangible assets of $5 million, which looks like it does not require operating history. They would need to raise at least an additional $4 million via Aspire after Oct 27.
That is this part (in bold) of the $2 SP Nasdaq requirement:
** To qualify under the closing price alternative, a company must have: (i) average annual revenues of $6 million for three years, or (ii) net tangible assets of $5 million, or (iii) net tangible assets of $2 million and a 3 year operating history, in addition to satisfying the other financial and liquidity requirements listed above.
This could actually explain a few things:
A) The delay in uplisting. It would take some time to raise the capital via Aspire.
B) The timing of the shelf. If they chose this route they would use up most of their Aspire deal. They might as well liquidate the Aspire deal, and they would want possible future financing in place.
This is just throwing out another possible theory so we are not surprised if it happens. I am not sure that this would be worth doing to go Nasdaq instead of NYSE-mkt.
I have a feeling we will find out shortly.
AI
