InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 82
Posts 42111
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 01/05/2010

Re: av1atic post# 83087

Wednesday, 09/04/2013 5:47:23 PM

Wednesday, September 04, 2013 5:47:23 PM

Post# of 130511

Any opinions/answers to these questions? Just curious:



According to my sources, BD LymPro results have come out of negative. They will not be receiving any funding from BD for CLIA. That is the reason why AMBS had to raise $3M immediately.



"My sources", despite claims made for a similarly described entitiy by some posters on this board, are unverifiable and should be taken with a grain.

The need for funding has been noted by AMBS for some time now and the 'souces' claim seems to be contradicted by the statement below released today.

Any communication from BD to AMBS about failure of the LymPro assays being done by by BD would likely result in the omission of any mention of commercialization in today's PR from AMBS.

this transaction will allow the Company to operate well into 2014, where we expect to begin generating revenue through LymPro commercialization and bring MANF closer to first-in-man human clinical studies."




Could it be that AMBS is a scam?



Comes at the end of a paragraph noting the impressive presence of the impressively credentialed Dr. Rubinfeld. Nuff said.

Some of the recent peer-reviewed publications are coming from independent groups working on MANF. How does their success (for whatever indications they are researching on) help AMBS?



Any independent research pointing to the usefullness of MANF shows up on the radar screens of Pharm companies looking for such results from compounds in their earliest stages of development.

That is organic news for AMBS that costs nothing and which places the MANF story in front of potential collaborators/JV partners.