Ocata Therapeutics Inc fka OCAT

[Dragon Lady]

Quote wrong again, "This statement makes no sense:"

No, the statement makes 100% clear sense and is correct. The stock- despite a "paper" (article published, whatever one wants to call it), despite who knows how many Sr mgt and staff changeovers over the years and now a "new" team at the top again- a sign of a failing company, not a stable one- when their entire Sr ranks are "purged" following SEC violations and a whole other wash-list of failure to deliver, despite endless promises that things are "close", despite endless rumors of supposedly "something big" is "about" to maybe happen like GE being located down the street along with Walmart and a McDonalds and a Starbucks, despite the so called "uplist" and R/S spliting the stock 100:1 or whatever the enormous number was (Reverse splits are desperation moves typically, no healthy, successful, growing comapny EVER reverse splits their stock, they FORWARD SPLIT IT) and all the despite all the rest of the blah, blah, blah - despite any of that, the FACT REMAINS:

That is the R/S is backed out RIGHT NOW TODAY- one ends up with a 6.17 CENT STOCK that would have over 3 BILLION shares of dilution present. PERIOD.

"uplisting" has caused no real price appreciation or increase in value to the stock- it's lost value if anything since the magic "uplist". Changing out Sr. Mgt AGAIN and issuing a whole new pay n perks increase program (with one insider selling out a large chunk again, near a perfect short term "pop" in the stock- typical insider dumping for this company)- despite that the share price/value has made no real significant gains or increase.

Despite all that above "big supposed stuff" in 2014 and now the END OF Q-1 2015, the company has attracted NO MAJOR SOURCE OF NON-DILUTIVE financing and is living off of 100% pure, low grade Lincoln "credit card" financing that is dwindling fast by the day and they are CASH LOW as always- despite the big supposed "uplist" (with a botched, costly, failed secondary offering to go with it, as they had no takers or buyers of their shares at anything but bottom basement- despite the bio-tech sector being one of the hottest in history, during probably the biggest bull market run in world history) thus they have not brought in any large capital to START THEIR KEY TRIALS and have NOT STARTED THE PROMISED PHASE II, large FDA KEY TRIAL despite stating end of 2014 was the "goal" (see Lanza quoted in local MA newspaper)- and it's now END OF Q-1 2015, still no financing, still no trial commencing.

It makes no difference when one bought shares- that does not alter the reality of where this company is at in its historical share price massive decline and the company history of failing to produce any salable products yet as promised for years, or any ROI to any investor base since inception, etc.

What price one bought shares at does not alter any of that- the historical share price and where it sits to today (a 98% plus loss since trading public) is un-altered via when anyone bought a share or not. The company's poor financial condition and lack of ability to attract large capital to finance large trials etc is not altered via someone buying a R/S $6 bucks and change share of stock today - makes no difference to their just published, SEC filed, 10-K balance sheet- which shows them bleeding down cash and that they'd rapidly be insolvent/BK if not for diluting every month or two on the Lincoln, rapidly dwindling (easily less than $18 mil left on it now) credit line.

Simple as that.

ALL THE BEST, KIRK

Here's the highly respected journal Nature, an excellent article IMO. Explains very well IMO the long, "sorted" history of ACTC/OCAT IMO- and sounds like pretty much the same company as today to me, nothings really changed that I can see?

http://www.nature.com/news/stem-cell-research-never-say-die-1.9759

Quote from Nature article:

" Critics say that the company has damaged the field more than once with its high-profile, controversial announcements, such as one describing the company's attempts to clone a human embryo1 in 2001. ACT's actions — and the highly politicized nature of stem-cell research — scared off investors, leaving the company teetering on the verge of bankruptcy for most of the past decade."

Quote again from Nature article:

"Not everyone is convinced. Even if positive results emerge from these trials, ACT will still face major challenges in getting an ES-cell-based therapy approved for wider use. And some in the field are sceptical about ACT's reformation. “Can you really trust a company that has a spotty record?” says Arthur Caplan, a bioethicist at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia."

That's the journal "Nature" speaking, their words and those of some of the top people in the "stem cell" field. How many "big changes" ago was that written- and what's happened to the price/company performance since? (steadily declined share price, mountains of dilution and now a R/S, that's what) and Oh, just some SEC violations and another "purge" of nearly the entire Sr. mgt ranks, LOL. Yeah, after that guy at U of Pennsylvania made that statement- seems he was spot on correct to me and a bit of a "sage" and seer of what was to come IMO, maybe?