Who knew that a company would be allowed to reverse-split its way onto the NASDAQ? Hopefully the application is denied. Bear in mind also the following 4 factors:
1. At $4.13 per share, that’s already dramatically lower than the effective price immediately following the MOST RECENT R/S.
2. The current EPS (-22.75 according to TDA) clearly reveals these R/Ss (for anyone who knows how to read financial reports OVER TIME). Take some simple numbers to demonstrate the point: -$50,000 earnings/1,000,000 outstanding shares= -$.05 EPS, while the same -$50,000 earnings/2,000 outstanding shares = -$25 EPS.
3. While it is true that a R/S, IN ITSELF, doesn’t change a shareholder’s ownership interest, when followed by subsequent DILUTION (such as we saw after the LAST R/S roughly two years ago, after which the OS again swelled to around 1.2 BILLION leading into the most recent R/S), one typically sees a DRAMATIC diminution of a shareholder’s ownership interest—as anyone who has experienced these R/Ss with CELZ can attest (assuming that they can analyze their way out of a wet paper sack). The linked article points to an IMMEDIATE addition of 3.875 million shares (DILUTION) to the current post R/S outstanding shares of around 2.45 million (according to TDA). Then, too, there is the warrant for an ADDITIONAL 3.875 million potentially to be added over the next 5 years.
4. Assuming the company has true profit potential, why would it not reveal that to the market over the course of the last 3-4 years—when massive dilution occurred, which led to the two R/Ss referenced above? Instead the developments described above occurred, more or less as outlined here—even as they proclaimed that “we delivered” and “value our shareholders.”
***Not financial advice, I’m merely pointing to historical patterns that can easily be uncovered by anyone who wishes to understand the HISTORICAL CONTEXT at play here. As always, I’m happy to be PROVEN wrong—but bring receipts, not hollow-ringing rhetoric: “in God we trust—all others bring data.” (Deming)
