Pluristem Therapeutics Inc (PSTI)

[Scott999]

Hi Spidey,

Not entirely sure which post you were responding to. Maybe from a week ago which yes, you already answered thank you.

What I was more recently asking about over the weekend was with regards to the delay in preclinical studies from Fukushima and NYBC. They are now more than double the timeframe estimated. The trials that don't involve enrolment of humans, only mice or whichever animal they are using.

Using the logic of ethics, cro promises and such, don't really cut it for me. Yes I'm sure that this could be the case at times. But at what point should the company be held accountable for the timeframes they state. Pretty much every single one they have put out is missed. Not by a month, a quarter...but often more than a year. No explanation, nothing. Just changed presentations. You have stated they could be a little more transparent. They are not transparent at all!!! I will continue to chalk these many missteps, that continue on without any explanation or guidance, to our incompetent management and board.

Yes the IC timeframe to enrol was horrific. Who really knows. Your explanation is quite feasible. But we are now a month late on interim results in HCT. The one they hired the secretive, large CRO for way back in 2016.

Could all of these misses just simply be management throwing out pretty much fictitious timeframes to lure investors into taking the plunge? Quite honestly, I think this may just be the case. Only trouble with that is you burn your bridges and piss investors off like they have done with some here, and lose all credibility.

My other question of which was overlooked was regarding the board member who's resume has not been proven to add up. A reason Pluristem felt they were suitable to be a board member.

Here's the quote from the 10K

During 2003 to 2004 Mr. Ben-Yoram served as a director of Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. (BCLI) and Smart Energy solutions, Inc. (SMGY), both of which were traded on the NASDAQ. Just have a look at the blue section at the top of the links I have now provided.

Brainstorm wasn't formed until November 22, 2014. Was Golden Hand resources before that time.

https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0001137883&owner=exclude&count=40&hidefilings=0

Or Smart Energy Solutions. Wasn't formed until September 1st 2005. Was Datigen before then and at the time in question.

https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?company=Smart+energy+solutions&owner=exclude&action=getcompany

And please feel free to go through any of the filings and see if you find his name as director anywhere. I tried, and couldn't.

And that's just one of the three board members I have found with questionable resumes.

I also wondered about Lior Raviv. An R&D analytical researcher in 2010-2011 for Teva. Then hired to Pluristem and now VP of Development. Was wondering if these are normal steps to get to such an important title at this lightning speed.

Or the head of HR only having experience at Elbit Vision Systems. Feel confident in her ability to take the vast experience gained at Elbit, to being able to understand the needs of a Biotech?

You make a point of Protalix. They have experience yes. They have a lingering price yes. But they have made deals and seems pretty impressive from what you have written. Kind of shows even with good management that is able to do deals, it's still hard to improve price. What would their price be if they had incompetent management and wasn't able to get these deals?

Yes I may agree that change in management may not have an immediate effect on our price. But bring people in that have the ability to look at our company and provide a clear direction and set attainable goals, I truly believe investor confidence would be enhanced tremendously.

Hopefully my comments don't get glanced over and dismissed. These are truly valid points about the integrity and lack of qualified people in important positions. Your help on the trial and product side have been stellar. But to chalk the misfits in this company and poor resumes as being ok, or we don't know the inner workings of the company or comments of such, does a complete injustice to this board. Only a few take a similar stance as mine, or at least express it. I would hope others are starting to believe the truth.

Again I have yet to hear any argument whatsoever that states otherwise. Yes we are progressing with trials and have yet to have any bad news on a study. But we have yet to see a study with numbers to back it up. That will change come April. Still hoping and still believe in the technology. Just hope others don't beat us to the finish line.