|
Post by jeff on Nov 23, 2014 1:39:20 GMT
Rabin didn't seem too concerned either ... about anything. I don't suggest anyone factor in CEO body language into their financial decisions. The only thing I'm taking to the bank are my sizable profits this year. Rabin mah not have been overly concerned about complying with SEC reporting requirements, or maybe not so concerned with ensuring the folks dealing with his trades were followe SEC rules (benevolent neglect?) but he was clearly concerned with SOME things of consequence to ACT investors--like bailing is out of a pretty gnarly set of financing relationships. [/quote] Sorry for all of the typos--still trying to figure out how to post here.
|
|
|
Post by tradeup on Nov 23, 2014 1:48:37 GMT
Rabin mah not have been overly concerned about complying with SEC reporting requirements, or maybe not so concerned with ensuring the folks dealing with his trades were followe SEC rules (benevolent neglect?) but he was clearly concerned with SOME things of consequence to ACT investors- -like bailing is out of a pretty gnarly set of financing relationships.Jeff- And how did that work out for ACT investors? I hope you are aware Rabin was also a lender to ACT (warrant holder through PDPI, LLC). By settling the lawsuits he basically settled with himself. He was also a member of the BOD when many of these illegal deals occurred.
|
|
|
Post by jckrdu on Nov 23, 2014 2:18:52 GMT
Q: MAO9 lines not xeno free. Does that matter with agencies, can commercialize? A: (Paul) MA09 not xeno free but not prohibiting us, long as we’re meeting safety margins and seeing results we can move forward. Data trumps everything. Safety data we have gives us a lot of confidenceThere is no ambiguity in the above quote that the MA09 may be commercialized - that this is not a regulatory matter. Wotton also followed up with another statement right after that one, essentially repeating that the FDA just cares about result - almost in a manner as if to say "in the real world that's what the FDA is concerned with." Trade, you're unfortunately misunderstanding the point of Wotton's comments. He's indicating that they may bridge to alternative lines, but that's because it makes business sense to have a diversity of lines that the company has in its banks and are available to commercialize - but taken together with the other quote, this is not a regulatory necessity, but rather a possible business decision that they may be reviewing (perhaps with potential partners) that they just can't discuss. I believe they will eventually create another line - but that's not a risk, that's a plus. Sounds to me like Wotton is referring to clinical trial progress, not licensure. Maybe investors should reach out to the company and get assurance on this topic. I would like to see their response. Agree, I took it as talking about trials moving forward. PW's statements such as "we can move forward" and "manufacturing is on top of it" are sufficiently vague regarding which line will be commercialized. PW didn't say anything that definitively stated MA09 will be commercialized. PW didn't say anything that definitively stated MA09 could not be commercialized. My guess is that they bridge to another line. I don't see any issues here. Getting clarity from OCAT would be nice, but PW doesn't seem to want to provide any more information for "confidentiality" reasons.
|
|
|
Post by HeyNow on Nov 23, 2014 2:39:24 GMT
Maybe tradeup should reach out- He seems the only one concerned. Let us know what they say...
|
|
|
Post by i(n) sight on Nov 23, 2014 2:56:32 GMT
Sounds to me like Wotton is referring to clinical trial progress, not licensure. Maybe investors should reach out to the company and get assurance on this topic. I would like to see their response. Agree, I took it as talking about trials moving forward. PW's statements such as "we can move forward" and "manufacturing is on top of it" are sufficiently vague regarding which line will be commercialized. PW didn't say anything that definitively stated MA09 will be commercialized. PW didn't say anything that definitively stated MA09 could not be commercialized. My guess is that they bridge to another line. I don't see any issues here. Getting clarity from OCAT would be nice, but PW doesn't seem to want to provide any more information for "confidentiality" reasons. I’ll take the confidentiality reasons giving OCAT the benefit of the doubt for now; foolish or not. Granted we have been tainted by past management and I think it colors some current thinking by some and I can understand that (twice burned, thrice shy). As I’ve said, I’ll concur that current management could have done some things different. However, anybody can be a Monday morning quarterback. Now, I like some of the little surprises like the talking to two companies as revealed at the ASM about the platelets. Or non-core possibilities question for animals with a retort by Wotton to why not apply such thinking to the platelets as well. The pendulum has started its swing towards the other way in my estimation. Who knows, they may be taking the Gomer Pyle approach to management as one day they exclaim “Surprise, surprise, surprise!”.
|
|
|
Post by Keybridge - Cult Member 003 on Nov 23, 2014 2:57:50 GMT
Maybe tradeup should reach out- He seems the only one concerned. Let us know what they say… Enquiring minds want to know...
|
|
|
Post by i(n) sight on Nov 23, 2014 3:04:07 GMT
Maybe tradeup should reach out- He seems the only one concerned. Let us know what they say… Enquiring minds want to know... Yes....and what puzzles me is Trade's previous comment given his grave concerns: "I look forward to investing in OCAT again when it is further diluted, oversold and there is money to be made." /quote Never know we could get a Gomer Pyle "Surprise, surprise, surprise!" and start crapping skittles and seeing unicorns!
|
|
|
Post by jckrdu on Nov 23, 2014 3:05:43 GMT
Maybe tradeup should reach out- He seems the only one concerned. Let us know what they say... I for one appreciate Tradeup's due diligence on this topic, as it is something an OCAT shareholder should be interested in contemplating. Based on everything that's been posted, I can draw my own conclusion on if I think there's an issue here. For me, the information discussed on this thread has me believing that OCAT will in fact bridge to another line before commercialization (even if I think they can commercialize MA09). But I don't think that's an issue as the bridging can be done in parallel. The only thing that's a little bit of a concern is the added cost of bridging to another line, but in the overall scheme of things it shouldn't have a major impact. For some others that may have also concluded that OCAT will bridge to an NED line before they commercialize, perhaps that adds additional schedule risk from their perspective that they'll factor into their thinking. For those that have read this thread and concluded that MA09 will be the line commercialized, that's fine as well... as it gave them some other things to think about. To say Tradeup "seems the only one concerned" is a bit of a flippant comment, and IMO dead wrong. I'm sure there are many silent readers that appreciated everything he's posted on this topic, as ACTC & GR first started talking about bridging to an NED line years ago for potential licensure issues (GR's words not mine)... and we still don't have any final and definitive clarity.
|
|
|
Post by JHam on Nov 23, 2014 3:21:28 GMT
Maybe tradeup should reach out- He seems the only one concerned. Let us know what they say... I for one appreciate Tradeup's due diligence on this topic, as it is something an OCAT shareholder should be interested in contemplating. Based on everything that's been posted, I can draw my own conclusion on if I think there's an issue here. For me, the information discussed on this thread has me believing that OCAT will in fact bridge to another line before commercialization (even if I think they can commercialize MA09). But I don't think that's an issue as the bridging can be done in parallel. The only thing that's a little bit of a concern is the added cost of bridging to another line, but in the overall scheme of things it shouldn't have a major impact. For some others that may have also concluded that OCAT will bridge to an NED line before they commercialize, perhaps that adds additional schedule risk from their perspective that they'll factor into their thinking. For those that have read this thread and concluded that MA09 will be the line commercialized, that's fine as well... as it gave them some other things to think about. To say Tradeup "seems the only one concerned" is a bit of a flippant comment, and IMO dead wrong. I'm sure there are many silent readers that appreciated everything he's posted on this topic, as ACTC & GR first started talking about bridging to an NED line years ago for potential licensure issues (GR's words not mine)... and we still don't have any final and definitive clarity. I couldn't agree more Jckrdu. I am also concerned about this issue. Maybe concerned is not the best word. More like curious. At the very least there is a need for more clarity on this issue. Wotton's comments at the ASM were not clear in my opinion and still leave room for question. As for tradeup. I am also extremely grateful for his contributions to this board. Even if this particular issue turns out to be nothing, I have learned a lot in the process. It is pretty narrow-minded in my opinion for some members here to be so quick to mock him and poo-poo his efforts. Looking at the past though, I guess it is par for the course.
|
|
|
Post by jckrdu on Nov 23, 2014 3:39:46 GMT
"Never know we could get a Gomer Pyle "Surprise, surprise, surprise!" and start crapping skittles and seeing unicorns!" _________________________________________
Hey Insight - I think PW is smart enough to know the power that surprise news has on the market. While I'm not expecting any non-core deals until Q2 2015 per the latest OCAT guidance in their deck - and PW's comment that they just "started" talking to 2 companies about platelets - OCAT has 10 very promising MSC opportunities moving quickly thru animal clinical trials. Any one of those 10 could turn into a major pre-clinical deal for OCAT sometime in 2015. Check out Aduro biotech (private company) that landed a $365 million pre-clinical deal with J&J for prostate cancer. Aduro has proved that those type of deals are possible with great data.
I'm glad Jooste is onboard, I think he'll have more success than GR & Matt V had at landing deals... can't do any worse, that's for sure. (Best thing GR did was not partner RPE early, so I will give him credit for that.)
|
|
|
Post by HeyNow on Nov 23, 2014 4:00:05 GMT
I for one appreciate Tradeup's due diligence on this topic, as it is something an OCAT shareholder should be interested in contemplating. Based on everything that's been posted, I can draw my own conclusion on if I think there's an issue here. For me, the information discussed on this thread has me believing that OCAT will in fact bridge to another line before commercialization (even if I think they can commercialize MA09). But I don't think that's an issue as the bridging can be done in parallel. The only thing that's a little bit of a concern is the added cost of bridging to another line, but in the overall scheme of things it shouldn't have a major impact. For some others that may have also concluded that OCAT will bridge to an NED line before they commercialize, perhaps that adds additional schedule risk from their perspective that they'll factor into their thinking. For those that have read this thread and concluded that MA09 will be the line commercialized, that's fine as well... as it gave them some other things to think about. To say Tradeup "seems the only one concerned" is a bit of a flippant comment, and IMO dead wrong. I'm sure there are many silent readers that appreciated everything he's posted on this topic, as ACTC & GR first started talking about bridging to an NED line years ago for potential licensure issues (GR's words not mine)... and we still don't have any final and definitive clarity. I couldn't agree more Jckrdu. I am also concerned about this issue. Maybe concerned is not the best word. More like curious. At the very least there is a need for more clarity on this issue. Wotton's comments at the ASM were not clear in my opinion and still leave room for question. As for tradeup. I am also extremely grateful for his contributions to this board. Even if this particular issue turns out to be nothing, I have learned a lot in the process. It is pretty narrow-minded in my opinion for some members here to be so quick to mock him and poo-poo his efforts. Looking at the past though, I guess it is par for the course. If you call working out numerous errors so the story is more clear "mocking and poo pooing" so be it. Lets not forget the issue started with tradeup writing MA09 is not cGMP compliant... I think we are all learning as we go here, tradeup included. I was done being told how idiotic me and all shareholders are some time back. This thread is a result (i think) of calling on tradeup to at least make an attempt to justify his position. Poo poo that.
|
|
|
Post by i(n) sight on Nov 23, 2014 4:11:27 GMT
I for one appreciate Tradeup's due diligence on this topic, as it is something an OCAT shareholder should be interested in contemplating. Based on everything that's been posted, I can draw my own conclusion on if I think there's an issue here. For me, the information discussed on this thread has me believing that OCAT will in fact bridge to another line before commercialization (even if I think they can commercialize MA09). But I don't think that's an issue as the bridging can be done in parallel. The only thing that's a little bit of a concern is the added cost of bridging to another line, but in the overall scheme of things it shouldn't have a major impact. For some others that may have also concluded that OCAT will bridge to an NED line before they commercialize, perhaps that adds additional schedule risk from their perspective that they'll factor into their thinking. For those that have read this thread and concluded that MA09 will be the line commercialized, that's fine as well... as it gave them some other things to think about. To say Tradeup "seems the only one concerned" is a bit of a flippant comment, and IMO dead wrong. I'm sure there are many silent readers that appreciated everything he's posted on this topic, as ACTC & GR first started talking about bridging to an NED line years ago for potential licensure issues (GR's words not mine)... and we still don't have any final and definitive clarity. I couldn't agree more Jckrdu. I am also concerned about this issue. Maybe concerned is not the best word. More like curious. At the very least there is a need for more clarity on this issue. Wotton's comments at the ASM were not clear in my opinion and still leave room for question. As for tradeup. I am also extremely grateful for his contributions to this board. Even if this particular issue turns out to be nothing, I have learned a lot in the process. It is pretty narrow-minded in my opinion for some members here to be so quick to mock him and poo-poo his efforts. Looking at the past though, I guess it is par for the course. Tradeup indeed has interesting takes on things and is very knowledgable. Keep in mind that there is a difference when he says: "I look forward to investing in OCAT again when it is further diluted, oversold and there is money to be made." /quote” What the hell is there to look “forward” too? I don’t look “forward" to further dilution with the company but I fully expect it and that we will be in the 5’s given the capital raise. And I will buy more. There is a big difference between the above two statements. I would venture to say that there are many on this board that read and never respond as they don’t feel they have the expertise to engage. And I’ll go further that this talk scares the crap out of some as, unless I missed it, what is tradeups bottom line as to how the impacts what OCAT can or cannot do. What looks like possible bashing veiled under an the guise of an academic discussion to the lay reader is disturbing, although I do not think, and want to believe, that is not trades intent. It is much more digestible to lay out the full ramifications of what his take is if licensure is a no-go. Could we be back at the start of new trials Phase I? Are we back to square one? If so, then he should say it. If I missed it, please enlighten me. I think if we could know what the membership at-large makes of this discussion, I would venture to say they are bewildered, and therein lies the rub. We’ll never know. The whole thing is starting to look like getting a PhD. Learning more and more about less and less until we know everything about nothing.
|
|
|
Post by HeyNow on Nov 23, 2014 4:30:03 GMT
Maybe tradeup should reach out- He seems the only one concerned. Let us know what they say... I for one appreciate Tradeup's due diligence on this topic, as it is something an OCAT shareholder should be interested in contemplating. Based on everything that's been posted, I can draw my own conclusion on if I think there's an issue here. For me, the information discussed on this thread has me believing that OCAT will in fact bridge to another line before commercialization (even if I think they can commercialize MA09). But I don't think that's an issue as the bridging can be done in parallel. The only thing that's a little bit of a concern is the added cost of bridging to another line, but in the overall scheme of things it shouldn't have a major impact. For some others that may have also concluded that OCAT will bridge to an NED line before they commercialize, perhaps that adds additional schedule risk from their perspective that they'll factor into their thinking. For those that have read this thread and concluded that MA09 will be the line commercialized, that's fine as well... as it gave them some other things to think about. To say Tradeup "seems the only one concerned" is a bit of a flippant comment, and IMO dead wrong. I'm sure there are many silent readers that appreciated everything he's posted on this topic, as ACTC & GR first started talking about bridging to an NED line years ago for potential licensure issues (GR's words not mine)... and we still don't have any final and definitive clarity. I would also guess there are readers that appreciate his posts, but i know there are readers that appreciate mine. I am only flippant with those who have shown a penchant for saying things like "im making huge profits and youre all losing money - hows that working out for you?" and otherwise disparaging comments for no good reason. I dont care what my tone is in response, especially when hilarity ("ma09 is not cgmp compliant") is written. If you and hammer want that type of misinformation to persist unopposed, OK. Otherwise ill prob just keep chimin in when i feel compelled and expect a prompt disappointed reply from you both, mixed in with a quick hit and run from one of eigenman's multiple personas. Its all good fun...
|
|
|
Post by CM kipper007 on Nov 23, 2014 5:09:01 GMT
I know that PW wasn't clear in his responses, but I do value that. Some may not agree with me though. Right now OCAT have proved this therapy to show advantageous results and there's companies and universities falling over themselves to catch up.
Let's keep the cloak over things until it's time to show the world.
|
|
|
Post by ridda on Nov 23, 2014 9:09:44 GMT
"And I’ll go further that this talk scares the crap out of some"
That's the idea. You really think he's posting all this stuff for educational purposes or to help out investors? IMO of course
|
|
|
Post by jckrdu on Nov 23, 2014 13:52:03 GMT
I for one appreciate Tradeup's due diligence on this topic, as it is something an OCAT shareholder should be interested in contemplating. Based on everything that's been posted, I can draw my own conclusion on if I think there's an issue here. For me, the information discussed on this thread has me believing that OCAT will in fact bridge to another line before commercialization (even if I think they can commercialize MA09). But I don't think that's an issue as the bridging can be done in parallel. The only thing that's a little bit of a concern is the added cost of bridging to another line, but in the overall scheme of things it shouldn't have a major impact. For some others that may have also concluded that OCAT will bridge to an NED line before they commercialize, perhaps that adds additional schedule risk from their perspective that they'll factor into their thinking. For those that have read this thread and concluded that MA09 will be the line commercialized, that's fine as well... as it gave them some other things to think about. To say Tradeup "seems the only one concerned" is a bit of a flippant comment, and IMO dead wrong. I'm sure there are many silent readers that appreciated everything he's posted on this topic, as ACTC & GR first started talking about bridging to an NED line years ago for potential licensure issues (GR's words not mine)... and we still don't have any final and definitive clarity. I would also guess there are readers that appreciate his posts, but i know there are readers that appreciate mine. I am only flippant with those who have shown a penchant for saying things like "im making huge profits and youre all losing money - hows that working out for you?" and otherwise disparaging comments for no good reason. I dont care what my tone is in response, especially when hilarity ("ma09 is not cgmp compliant") is written. If you and hammer want that type of misinformation to persist unopposed, OK. Otherwise ill prob just keep chimin in when i feel compelled and expect a prompt disappointed reply from you both, mixed in with a quick hit and run from one of eigenman's multiple personas. Its all good fun... Gimmee a break. There are all sorts of unanswered questions on whether or not MA09 has licensure issues. Absolutely nothing has been put to rest on that front. You're posting as if there's no potential issue at all (wrong... as a lengthy, costly, complicated and risk filled bridging study may in fact be required), you dismiss anything that doesn't mesh with your preconcieved ideas of what is (close-minded) and then go into a condescending attack mode in your posts by implying that Tradeup has an agenda (where's Agendaman?). If you read the thread from top to bottom, you'll see that Tradeup acknowledged he could have worded things better in one of his early posts on this thread, and didn't start get flippant with some others until after he was attacked and accused of having and agenda. But yeah, glad you're here to keep me, Tradeup and the Eigen's in a straightline.
|
|
|
Post by icellman on Nov 23, 2014 14:13:10 GMT
Jckrdu-
No disrespect for you, but you have to acknowledge that Bullard, Tradeup, Jham and their like have a negative tone to their posts. You can spin it any way you'd like, but it is undeniable. It's like O'Bama saying he's not a socialist, but his policies and his actions tell you exactly what he is. If it quacks, talks and walks like a duck, then it probably is. That's fine with me because everyone has a different viewpoint, but don't deny what is obvious, because if one doesn't, it makes them lose credibility.
|
|
|
Post by jckrdu on Nov 23, 2014 14:21:29 GMT
I would also guess there are readers that appreciate his posts, but i know there are readers that appreciate mine. I am only flippant with those who have shown a penchant for saying things like "im making huge profits and youre all losing money - hows that working out for you?" and otherwise disparaging comments for no good reason. I dont care what my tone is in response, especially when hilarity ("ma09 is not cgmp compliant") is written. If you and hammer want that type of misinformation to persist unopposed, OK. Otherwise ill prob just keep chimin in when i feel compelled and expect a prompt disappointed reply from you both, mixed in with a quick hit and run from one of eigenman's multiple personas. Its all good fun... Gimmee a break. There are all sorts of unanswered questions on whether or not MA09 has licensure issues. Absolutely nothing has been put to rest on that front. You're posting as if there's no potential issue at all (wrong... as a lengthy, costly, complicated and risk filled bridging study may in fact be required), you dismiss anything that doesn't mesh with your preconcieved ideas of what is (close-minded) and then go into a condescending attack mode in your posts by implying that Tradeup has an agenda (where's Agendaman?). If you read the thread from top to bottom, you'll see that Tradeup acknowledged he could have worded things better in one of his early posts on this thread, and didn't start get flippant with some others until after he was attacked and accused of having and agenda. But yeah, glad you're here to keep me, Tradeup and the Eigen's in a straightline. All - I'll add one more thing on this topic before moving on: So PW says that the agencies have been very helpful, that OCAT has no issues "moving forward" and that "manufacturing is on top of things" ... a vague response to a direct question about whether they will bridge to a NED line. Essentially PW said there are no issues at all... full steam ahead. OK PW, if that's the case, why isn't OCAT starting to inject Phase 2 Dry AMD patients (the big market) for another 7 months??? The Lancet data was great. PW said OCAT can start treating Phase 2 patients before completing Phase 1. So what's the hold-up starting Dry AMD Phase 2??? Yeah, maybe they're doing some dose escalation in the SMD trial to figure that out before they start injecting Dry AMD patients. Or.... Maybe the bridging to an NED line is in process right now, and it's taking more time, and needs to be completed before OCAT starts Phase 2 for Dry AMD using an NED line. (That's quite possible IMO as it meshes with what Matt Vincent said about building firewalls between the clinical trials so they all don't rely on the same line.) Maybe the bridging study is already having a negative schedule impact on starting the Phase 2 Dry AMD, after OCAT already suffered through a 3-4 year Phase 1 trial. IMO, that's what's happening... and the DD presented on this thread helped shape that overall opinion. PS - HeyNow: You know I value your posts and your presence on this board. I think you're a great contributor. Please don't take any of my posts personnally where we may disagree on some things. Hard to have everything I'm thinking & feeling come through in these posts. Good debate.
|
|
|
Post by jckrdu on Nov 23, 2014 14:32:36 GMT
Jckrdu- No disrespect for you, but you have to acknowledge that Bullard, Tradeup, Jham and their like have a negative tone to their posts. You can spin it any way you'd like, but it is undeniable. It's like O'Bama saying he's not a socialist, but his policies and his actions tell you exactly what he is. If it quacks, talks and walks like a duck, then it probably is. That's fine with me because everyone has a different viewpoint, but don't deny what is obvious, because if one doesn't, it makes them lose credibility. Hey Icellman - Agree. Their negative outlook (in the near-term... not the long-term) reflects their thoughts and opinions as it relates to an investment in OCAT at this time with the capital raise pending. No one has to share their outlook, but I will point out that their outlook has been mostly right over the past 12-24 months. You can chose to dismiss what they say and instead listen to folks like CDC or Stemdynasty on ICELL who have got OCAT and the pps completely wrong over that same time period. And I don't think you can generalize and lump everyone together.... my comments above are speaking about JHam and Tradeup who I consider well-grounded realists that look equally and unemotionally at both the negatives and positives regarding biotech investing. I'm sure you'll see their posts turn more positive after OCAT is past the capital raise, has 12-18 months of capital on the balance sheet, without any major dilution or pending legal issues in front of them.
|
|
|
Post by HeyNow on Nov 23, 2014 14:37:40 GMT
I would also guess there are readers that appreciate his posts, but i know there are readers that appreciate mine. I am only flippant with those who have shown a penchant for saying things like "im making huge profits and youre all losing money - hows that working out for you?" and otherwise disparaging comments for no good reason. I dont care what my tone is in response, especially when hilarity ("ma09 is not cgmp compliant") is written. If you and hammer want that type of misinformation to persist unopposed, OK. Otherwise ill prob just keep chimin in when i feel compelled and expect a prompt disappointed reply from you both, mixed in with a quick hit and run from one of eigenman's multiple personas. Its all good fun... Gimmee a break. There are all sorts of unanswered questions on whether or not MA09 has licensure issues. Absolutely nothing has been put to rest on that front. You're posting as if there's no potential issue at all (wrong... as a lengthy, costly, complicated and risk filled bridging study may in fact be required), you dismiss anything that doesn't mesh with your preconcieved ideas of what is (close-minded) and then go into a condescending attack mode in your posts by implying that Tradeup has an agenda (where's Agendaman?). If you read the thread from top to bottom, you'll see that Tradeup acknowledged he could have worded things better in one of his early posts on this thread, and didn't start get flippant with some others until after he was attacked and accused of having and agenda. But yeah, glad you're here to keep me, Tradeup and the Eigen's in a straightline. Im not dismissing anything and agree there are unknowns about the cell line ultimately used. That is hopefully where everyone is at now... tradeup certainly was not before the dialogue began. "Ocata WILL NOT be commercializing MA09" Why dont you go back to the annual shareholder thread and read how the discussion started? Tradeup didnt know the difference between xeno-free and cGMP, but took the liberty to tell us all MA09 is a dead end. My response was hardly flippant and after he continued to say the same thing i asked him on what grounds he thought that. Thats a real discussion. And worthwhile to have. Evidently you agree since you found the thread very useful. Dont read the entire discussion we have then at the end of it all come on and lecture me for my attitude.
|
|