They have their fair share of negative issues, which you neglected to include...
1. TRIALS
They're currently in trials for only SMD & AMD, and while some may think that's enough, the company is still a one trick pony at the moment, with too much risk involving just a couple of trials based on the same method of utilizing RPE cells to halt the progression of these diseases. They claim engraftment, but with how many of the patients? About a year and a half ago during one of the conferences, the head doctor (Schwartz) slipped up by informing the world that less than 10% of the cells injected survived, and before they made an adjustment, ZERO of the cells survived. No matter how you cut it, that's an extremely poor survival rate, not to mention a waste of cells, and the limited results in visual improvement reflect upon this failure. We keep seeing the word "cure" being thrown around in the investment community, but ironically the PPS is still in sub ten-cent penny land.
What about the other trials? Between the Myoblast (heart) trials that were already in phase II but never restarted after being purchases from Mytogen, the HG trials (blood) that never started, and of course the recent ones they're pedaling that are always just around the corner to being filed as an IND, how long does it take to get things moving? Here's the problem, folks. Most of the $$$$ that could have been used for all of these great trials went towards lawsuits, huge payoffs for ACT's management, and of course dilution just to keep the lights on. That's why the HG and Myoblast startups that they had planned way back in 2008 never took place in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, and likely the same for this year. It's the theme here, people, and if you think that the government or some other magical investment group is going to invest in obsolete embryonics, which are the only trials they have going at the moment, then think again. I say obsolete, not because they're incapable of being utilized to some degree, but rather because the scientific community, and the general populace want nothing to do with unethical and questionable methods, especially when other methods such as iPS are possible to achieve the same, if not better results. That's why it would have been beneficial if ACT had originally sought the path of adult cell therapies in the beginning, since they already had a phase II trial ready to go in Myoblast but just needed the funding. ACT's image with cloning likely never helped either in getting much of anything started. History has proven though that dilution could have been done to get those trials going. Instead, it went mostly to ACT manager payouts and deplorable business practice that ended up as lawsuits.
2. PARTNERSHIPS & FINANCING
They have no partnerships that are paying for trials, and their financing is dilution of shares in the billions. Investors thought that a Chinese deal was coming early last year, but nothing materialized. Even if they did manage to form a JV in China, they'd have to be concerned about losing their IP to foreigners. Forming a JV in Europe might also be a challenge, as gaining IP in Europe has proven to be tough because of the laws around scientific research and unethical methods. ACT tries to circumvent this by changing the claims as a positive for the human embryo, which may not convince less gullible parties, mainly the examiners.
3. ACT'S MANAGEMENT
None of the managers have instilled any confidence other than exciting people with blogs and tweets, and over the years they've padded their bank accounts with lofty salaries and ridiculous payouts worth millions in stock. Not once has one of the managers or BOD bought shares on the open market, yet the freebie shares are often sold and sometimes at the worst moments possible; claims of tax purposes often given as a reason. While ACT'S management may seem like a strong base, their CSO, Dr Lanza has often slipped up his public communication and has been quite expensive for his work, IMO. As for the CEO, what exactly has he done, and why does he continue to claim that he feels the same pain as his investors from a PPS standpoint? All of his shares were given to him for free! This man has done absolutely nothing to improve shareholder value, and there's a trail of missed milestones and false hopes, including the Chinese JV debacle, the 1/80 reverse split and uplisting to a major exchange that never took place and the INDs that are always just about to be filed. On top of that, the CEO often seems critical of his investors. Clearly they're the reason for ACT's poor stock performance and not the bad decision making on behalf of management.
4. ACTC VALUE & INVESTMENT POTENTIAL
I would say that until revenue is there, that it's too risky to invest based on the overall dilutive nature of the company's stock and management's continued lack of creating or at the very least holding shareholder value. The company is primarily a pre-clinical biotech company that's working in a relatively new field and only has two trials going, SMD and AMD. The hype alone around it and the positive work of Dr Lanza has kept the market cap over 100M (currently around 200M MC) for a while now, but I think that the stock is currently significantly overbought. I also believe that gaining traction of support for the embryonics trials will continue to be as tough as ever. While there's much excitement around their shift to working with MSCs, it should be noted that their IP around such is limited the last I checked. Companies like Osiris and others hold many patents related to MSCs, and I could see ACT struggling to find a way around their methods.
AI
