Pithicus - lot of backstory to VASO that one needs to understand with respect to the price action.
there were a lot (and I am one of them) long term, steadfast shareholders that were deeply vested in the impact and potential of the EECP therapy that the company was solely working on (prior to Ma and the GEHC deal). the two largest shareholders (Syrbnik brothers) basically bought the company and put Ma in as CEO who was a high level manager at another one of their companies. they purchased the company based on their belief in the EECP therapy (one was a regular patient and i think still is).
EECP has been a long and winding road and has never caught on in the US for a variety of reasons - mostly it is going up against a very strong headwind of resistance coming out of the ACC who refuse to consider it as anything more than junk science after the PEECH results failed to definitively show mechanism and lacked peer review. since then - the mechanism has been determined (endothelial function) and there has been significant peer review (published) and numerous 3rd party trials/results published. they have failed to get any traction with CMS in getting this moved beyond a means of last resort for Angina and CHF. if they got this to the forefront -things change instantly.
the company did a solid deal with GEHC that provided much needed cash to the company and returned them to profitability in 2011 where they did $3.9MM in net income. since then, they have had several failed (or definitely suspect) acquisitions that have NOT produced results on the top or bottom line (BIOX, MobiCare, JV with ECP/EECP) and there have been suspect relationships in these acquisitions. their SG&A has become bloated, share structure has increased nearly 50%, and the compensation has grown enormously not only in the number of high level personnel receiving $500K plus but their year to year increases (not to mention bonuses). all the while, the stock has decreased in price steadily since the highs coming off the 2011 results.
mgmt has been unable to clearly articulate their "vision" or strategy and have alienated long term shareholders with their major pivot away from EECP and into medical device/wireless IT where few really understand how this becomes viable. an analyst asked specifically who their peers were on prior conference call and after Ma (CEO) gave a bumbling response - Beecher finally came in and addressed the questions specifically (they really have no peers - what they are doing is basically unique so they can not hold anyone else up next to them to compare and contrast).
the Netwolves acquisition is shrouded in bias. the two primary shareholders are on the BOD of VASO and Castle is on the compensation committee. NEITHER have purchased ANY shares of VASO at any time on the open market but got a large sum for Netwolves plus attractive interest bearing notes backed by VASO assets. when the company finally had a definitive open window for insiders to purchase late last year - there was almost no purchases except from Ma and while they were not token - they werent exactly significant with respect to instilling confidence. meanwhile - the company has not provided net income #s for Netwolves so that shareholders really know what they are buying (nor or and/or have they provided detailed accounting of the books so that shareholders can see where the money was going - such as in Castle and Lieberman's pockets).
this has led to a very disenfranchised and frustrated shareholder base that is finally selling and moving on. while i have not sold, i would dramatically lighten my share count on any significant run. i dont like the lack of transparency, i dont like castle or lieberman (they are smug and snotty to shareholders in person when the company held shareholder meetings) and they dont bother returning calls or emails. i have not had that issue with Ma or Beecher.
the Netwolves acquisition will really take another 2-4 quarters to really determine the value it brings to shareholders (I forgot to mention that VASO has $12-14MM in CASH and NO DEBT prior to that acquisition). 4Q15 they added $9MM in revenues attributed to the Netwolves acquisition but only increased net income $200K in the quarter. this could have been due to cost reductions in other areas of their business that they had been focused on in 2015. so - did Netwolves actually add anything profitable to VASO or did the company buy hollow revenues with inflated books? again - it will probably take 2-4 quarters for Wall Street to really buy into that acquisition especially with the history of failed acquisitions.
finally - the GEHC deal is perishable. though the company has renewed the agreement twice and has done a VERY stellar job growing that segment - it is perishable and just a distribution agreement. VASO has no control over it. VASO has worked diligently in redefining the business and getting away from being a one product company (EECP) but they have not proved they can make money doing so WITHOUT the GEHC lifeline. IF they definitely prove that to the market - the company share price will move quickly. it is trading at 3-5X discount to peers in the med device industry on a PE basis and on a 12 month forward looking basis (including Netwolves revenues) - it would be 5-10X behind on a P/s basis. however, they are not getting that premium (i believe) based on all the above).
they are mired in a 3-4 year low trading channel when they should be moving up with instilled confidence (especially after two years of positive net income and affirmation of being positive in 2016 from Ma in CC). however, until the dedicated sellers are exhausted and/or start believing in the new strategy/model that is ridiculously in-articulated at every turn - the price will probably stay in the 16-20 channel.
prior to the massive share giveaway starting in 2012 to the new insiders - Ma and the Syrbniks were the only insiders that had more shares than I. i also know several shareholders that have larger holdings than i do. we have been particularly incensed at teh increase in OS and the give aways to lieberman (he charged the company over $300K in legal fees in 2015 in addition to his buyout of Netwolves and compensation as a BOD member), castle, hill, and others (Dempsey issue should be researched as well since the prior 6MM share buyback the company did looked like a veiled payoff to him for his silence on the failed GEHC takeover debacle. none of these guyshave provided ANY tangible results since their inclusion, the stock price is at multi year lows, and yet the company still keeps giving away shares.
i have followed this company since before the PEECH trials and have been invested shortly after the price decline following the PEECH trials. i have between 1-2MM shares and will not disclose further due to confidentiality issues. i did some selling at the 30 and 25 level on the way down and then some at the 18 and 20 levels while it was in the channel. i have picked up some in the 16-17 range prior to 4Q15 results being disclosed but it was in a separate account that i bought for short term trading purposes.
hope this helps give you a foundation for your own DD. being a large shareholder i would absolutely love to see the price finally and definitively bottom and see if those buying up the never ending shares being offered in the 16-18 range are real long term holders or just speculative buyers playing that channel (which it appears based on last 6-9 months of trading).
i have the luxury of time based on my age and financial position and am not an active trader. however, the opportunity cost of holding has been staggering in light of returns elsewhere the last 3-4 years. that is something that i and several others have expressed to mgmt that either dont get the concept or completely blow off. some of them just do not get that they are "competing" for investment capital and the kevin costner approach does NOT work for investors when they are not the ones building the field or seeing ANY tangible results.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
