InvestorsHub Logo

cheynew

09/20/17 7:49 AM

#312269 RE: bidrite #312268

Exactly!

Protector

09/20/17 8:16 AM

#312270 RE: bidrite #312268

bidrite, I don't know why I even reply to your deformed representation of my postings but here are some:

If I make a statement at a moment there are 300Mil outstanding PPHM shares then it is logical that 2$ on those positions is EXACTLY the same as 14$ after a 1-7 RS.

The sole fact that such examples are given to make whatever point it is you try to make does shows that you count on the readers ignorance of certain facts to achieve your goal because indeed without the 1-7 RS split in the same paragraph one probably doesn't understand that 2$ becomes 14$ after the RS.

That the RS was highly unlike was actually a very good possibility. After the RONIN letters and its argument depending on the effect of the Reverse Split and that expected unhappiness of shareholders about it I think we can see why the PPHM PPS we cleanly kept under one dollar. We also know who has the pocket depth to make that happen and fit the plan.

The ATM statement is perfectly true. Of course now that PPHM uses the ATM anymore (hopefully longer term but possible only short term depending on other events) one will have to start the discussion on WHAT ABUSIVE USE is. In my book good use is and was using the ATM to fund operations, clinical trials (e.g. SUNRISE) and as a contingency tools (see H2 2012). But since PPHM advertised NO DIFFERENT USE of the ATM as it did over the past 5 years, NOW SUDDENLY 'abusive use' is translated in the fact that the BoD out of the ATM revenue pays their huge compensations.
That is for sure an ABUSE (since the court moved it from 500K+ to 400K) but it is CERTAINLY NOT the abuse of the ATM as intended.

The BLA was just explained. Ignoring the explanation doesn't change the fact and repeating it over and over again neither. Just gives me opportunity to demonstrate that the counter arguments on the BASIC TOPIC AT HAND are NULL to ZERO otherwise they would have been the response.

And I can go on for a while. Again, shooting at me shows the real basic arguments on the topic are GONE. Give me another way someone could come up with 26K PPHMP (worth about 50+K$) in a virtually DRY PPHMP market.


AIM.

corporalagarn

09/20/17 8:30 AM

#312275 RE: bidrite #312268

Don't forget

Quote:

The massive dilution earlier this year was to avoid the going concern and to fund avid III

Result:

Going concern paragraph and Avid III put on hold.

ststephensrevenge

09/20/17 9:31 AM

#312284 RE: bidrite #312268

Way to bring it.

Don't be deceived by all the misleading, confusing, pie in the sky proclamations that are expected to be taken as fact by the unsuspecting.

If it doesn't pass the sniff test, it is what it is.

P...U...

The corrupt regime is gone soon.