I had to come back to post here to shed some light on this billion dollar? I truly believe that I have the answer and the rationale behind ACTC sandbagging the ITLD, the single highest binary event in ACTC corporate history and there are 2 parts to this 1. File complete 10K with SEC by April 1, 2014, there are only 3 trading days left for that and per Interim President/VP/CFO Mr. Ted Myles today at REG MED conference today clearly mentioned that ACTC plans to have the 10k out by Monday or Tuesday next week.
2. The bigger of the two issues is the ARONSON/GORTON case which was supposed to be settled by March 2014 but the date was delayed to April 29, 2014 to accommodate the Judge, this is a settlement date, meaning the 2 parties have agreed to settle and move on and with that close the chapter of legacy issues from the previous management. ACTC settlement will be very cost effective right now since they are not cash rich yet, if you catch my point. This is the single most logical reason to delay the data for just a bit longer matter of weeks.
Finally, ACTC Interim Top Line Data is single most binary event in history of medicine and this is not be taken lightly the entire world eyes are on us and don't doubt for a second that there are partnership talks behind the scenes with big pharma, clean up the books before partnership. ACTC has another amendment submitted to FDA to forego the 4th cohort and introduce multiple blebs of 100,000 cells in phase 2, we will hear about this protocol change in coming days. I have the patience to wait longer for the right reasons as ACTC with direction of the good Dr. Lanza WILL NOT make a mistake to appease the impatient shareholders and the executives of the company will not give away big chunk of the future to settle with bottom feeder warrant holders from the past. I remind all that claim that they are longs here to do check up from the neck up and realize the market opportunity just for ACTC RPE cell therapy is 10X Lucentis/Eylea!
Sentiment: Strong Buy
Tomorrow a Big Positive Surprise for many but not for the true believers of ACTC science..................................................................................................................only fools on April Fools day are people that are on sidelines and Naked shorts!
Sentiment: Strong Buy
The mystery to why we ACTC shares surged 40% that one day few weeks ago:
Many large pharmaceutical companies are developing internal and external regenerative medicine programs—including Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, Shire, and GlaxoSmithKline. Some of this expansion is based on knowledge gained by employing stem cell technology in the drug discovery process; others, like Shire, are acquiring commercial stage companies, like Advanced Cell Technologies.
This might explain the quiet period..............................................................................................
Sentiment: Strong Buy
Re: .... Many large pharmaceutical companies.......... Shire, are acquiring commercial stage companies, like Advanced Cell Technologies..........
beareclawe • Mar 11, 2014 1:32 PM
Re: .... Everyone on iCell talks about big pharma partnerships on the horizon too...I really don't think this is the case. What is their incentive?......
LSR: Looking at your data sheets, I note that another catalyst you use is partnering. A small biotech company partnering with a large pharma is a very important factor, not just because of the financial and intellectual support but also because the large pharma is, in effect, validating that technology platform or approach for investors. But sometimes, after a partnership announcement, we see a selloff. Why?
MH: This is an interesting dilemma. Small companies need new money, and an upfront payment from a pharma is a nice way of monetizing some of their assets. A partnership also validates the product or platform, and gives the biotech security. To your question: Many times the large pharmaceutical company requires so much in a deal—such as a high percentage of future revenues—that if an investor uses a discounted cash flow (DCF) model, the value of the small biotech shrinks based on that partnership split. While an upfront payment will be nice for the company and nice for management and operations, it does not compute into a very high present value as compared to what those future revenues would have been without splitting them.
TLSR: Partnering is one more form of dilution, isn't it?
MH: Yes, it is. I've heard this from investors and I've heard it from smaller companies: A lot of times they don't like to see partnership deals done the way they are. They'd rather see companies raise money in the marketplace because they give away too much to the pharmaceutical companies on future royalty streams.
I also think many investors do not take future partnership splits into account enough when they're valuing a company. When we at Sagient look at a company's pipeline and put a valuation on its drugs, we try to assume what its future royalty agreements will be. A lot of times a small biotech only gets 20%, and that could really reduce the value in a DCF model. If you're only getting a 20% royalty, you need a billion-dollar drug to make up a decent valuation for yourself.
I think investors would rather see companies raise money in the marketplace, bring their drugs to a later stage of development (closer to approval) and then sell themselves outright to a pharmaceutical company, rather than give away a lot of the rights to a product. The proof of that is you do see quite high multiples on merger-and-acquisition deals.
The April conference is a settlement conference where the parties will hopefully resolve the case. It is not as you suggest a settlement date meaning that the parties have reached agreement.
THE SCIENTIST ARTICLE copy of the blockbuster news from Team Lanza:
What makes MSCs special is that they do not express certain cellular markers and thereby manage to evade the immune system. This means they can be administered therapeutically without suppressing the patient’s immune system — a necessity with most grafts and organ transplants. Further, MSCs seem to move toward damaged tissue and assist in repair by both differentiating into key cells themselves, and by recruiting other repair factors to the site. But making MSCs of consistent quality and sufficient quantity to treat patients has been tricky.
Paul K. wrote: A second key issue is immunogenicity. The authors assert rather absolutely that hESC-MSCs could be used in an allogeneic manner in human patients without immunosuppression and without negative consequences. I’m not so sure that we know that to be so clearly the case. While hESC-MSCs may have some level of immunoprivilege, immunosuppression could well prove necessary when used in an allogeneic manner. Again this is an issue where at this point we just don’t know. In contrast, even lab-expanded endogenous MSCs when used autologously would not require immunosuppression.
“[This] report provides an alternative to the limitations on MSC expansion that have presented such a challenge to the field,” said Daniel Peterson, who directs the Centre for Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine at Rosalind Franklin University’s Chicago Medical School and was not involved in the study.
“Since chronic inflammation is known to cause numerous human diseases, it will be of great interest to test the therapeutic effects of this unlimited and safe cell source in other disease models such as Alzheimer's disease and rheumatoid arthritis,” Kwang-Soo Kim, a professor of psychiatry and neuroscience at McClean Hosptial in Belmont, Massachusetts, who was not involved in the work, told The Scientist in an e-mail.
Sentiment: Strong Buy
“The report . . . provides an alternative to the laborious and expensive clinical practice of harvesting a patient’s own bone marrow to isolate their MSCs for therapeutic use,” added Peterson.
In their paper, the authors proposed that further studies on this new line of stem cells—including on other animal models and diseases—could pave the route toward clinical application.
I am just blown away that ACTC PPS still hanging around .08 cents after this article got published in a peer review Journal, this is an insult to Dr. Lanza and his team.................................................
Sentiment: Strong Buy
As far as A/G goes, there was to be a Court Sponsored Settlement Conference in March, pushed to April, and now referred to as an "Alternative Dispute Resolution Hearing". I sincerely doubt there will be any news of 'a settlement' for months to come post Hearing.
ACTc will soon be running on fumes, if they aren't already.
There is so much promise, yet at the same time, so much unknown due to this extended management induced 'silent period', that I can only see one way to uncork the true value of all this 'promise', SELL the company, lock. stock and barrel.
Forget about keeping Ocular, and going it alone. If it has taken almost 3 years to treat 34 patients, who in their right mind thinks ACTc can conduct a Phase II trial with 200-300 patients, in a reasonable amount of time?
On another note, as I asked under another thread, what is with the ACTc Piper link up?
All I could find is; Doc 106: Motion for Miscellaneous Relief (Filed & Entered: 02/06/2014)
Joint MOTION Referral to Court-Sponsored Settlement Conference by Gary D Aronson.
GARY D. ARONSON,
ADVANCED CELL TECHNOLOGY, INC.
AND WILMINGTON TRUST, N.A. AS
SPECIAL ADMINISTRATOR OF THE
ESTATE OF WILLIAM MACKAY
JOINT MOTION FOR REFERRAL TO COURT-SPONSORED SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE
The parties through their respective counsel jointly request the Court refer these cases to Court-sponsored settlement conference without vacating the date for the Scheduling Conference on March 11, 2014, at 3:00 p.m.
Given the fact that the parties and counsel may be traveling from out of state to appear at the Scheduling Conference, the joint request would be to schedule the settlement conference on either March 10, 2014 or March 12, 2014, if possible.
Dated: February 6, 2014
COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF
GARY D. ARONSON
Counsel for ACT
Last 2 days have been capitulation of any shaky longs that were left here at Actc, even some hard core Actc icell shareholders goot shook out too because they were whining and crying(NOLASTEM) about 15 minutes that Ted talked about at the REG MED. MM's took out all stop losses to .0751, but I saw major blocks of 1.3 million plus at the bid that took hours to fill but they did not chase the ask like they have been doing lately. The reason the buyers did not chase the ask is because they know next week we got 10k coming out per Ted monday or tuesday but I would not try to time the Iterim Top Line DATA because the day ITLD hits ACTC will go 3 times whatever the price of the day is with volume topping 300 million+ shares in single day. I would bet $1,000 with any one here that ACTC ITLD will be out on or before Dr. Lanza speaks on APRIL 9, 2014!
Sentiment: Strong Buy
Agree 100% as I mentioned during the trading day today, they would most likely wait till after the A/G arb date as you have stated. It makes no sense to release good data before A/G swallows 400M shares. So...whats another month in the ACTC saga.