Replies to post #5625 on InVivo Therapeutics Holdings Corp (NVIVQ)

[joepcf]

Look Pal I am not here to argue or boast about this point or that. Should it be trading where it is now evidently you feel your the only one who can answer that correctly and that's fine with me. The market is a bipolar instrument of measure. This was trading in the teens with a lot less, so who's to say.
Langer is second to none but how he was able to work with Frank and us at the same time when the two were fighting sure seemed conflicted. I am not suggesting anything ill will on his part just weird in business.
I am very interested to know why we never regained our relationship with the Miami Project especially after we added one their docs to our board from the UofM.
The fact that these board members are not buying stock or supporting this company with insider buys is certainly not positive and who knows their reasons. My post was not a reply or challenge to you or anybody else just simply a comment on the share price period.

[TheHound]

wrong. the minimum bid price requirement stems from Section 5550(a)(2) of the Nasdaq's Equity Rules guide. It clearly states: "(a) Continued Listing Requirements for Primary Equity Securities: (2) Minimum bid price of at least $1 per share."

I have spent hundreds of hours over the past three years completing due diligence on Invivo Therapeutics.... It is also correct that this stock must stay at $4p/s to remain within the NASDQ listing that it currently has...

[TheHound]

wrong again.

under a buck for a period of 30 consecutive days makes a company dificient. upon receipt of the deficiency notice, the company has 180 days to be compliant.

compliancy means the company's share price must rise above a buck for at least 10 consecutive days in the 180-day period.

with I believe a 90 day correction period