I haven't spoken up in a while because many of you here won't like what I have to say. But now, I feel it's time to express my opinions on this co. and mgmt.
IMO, I warn caution in approaching this stock.
Silence is a killer and so far PSTI has hushed up about the hold since receiving the FDA letter. Nobody here knows the contents, so please don't try to say you do & it's nothing to worry about. If there were no concerns, PSTI would have responded quickly & efficiently and the FDA would have made its decision at this point. "PSTI Submits Response to FDA" would be a great headline to wake to . Too bad we haven't seen it.
The news we have heard to date is a bunch of fluff to bury the real issue here. The only significant item has been the $3M grant from their "cronies" in the Israeli government to give a boost in morale. I'm not sure how much weight I would put into this. The rest has been mere rat droppings.
South Korea & Cha, ha. PSTI needed some good PR. I would assume Cha has been knocking at the door for a while & given the circumstances, mgmt. had to let them in. SK wants to be on the edge of the biotech world. The positives are it would be a joint venture with approval & the SK trials paid for. I do give mgmt. credit for not giving away the house, but no upfront cash? For those that think the FDA would accept the SK data on its own, go back in history & look at the cloning fiasco a few years back. Do you really think the FDA would accept anything from SK without running their own US trials? BTW, the whole deal is contingent upon a September milestone.
I could go on but those that have been here know the rest. The lack of transparency, the lack of communication with investors, the lack of institutional ownership, the lies, the ATM. The technology & manufacturing have great potential, but safety & efficacy come first & so far we can't be 100% sure
These are only my opinions & I could be 100% wrong, the hold lifted & the data positive.
angelxes, thanks. I'm only bearish here to provide some realistic views to those that are too emotionally attached with this stock. They paint a rosy picture but the fact remains this is an emerging biotech with plenty of risk and their lead candidate on hold until further notice. Like many here, I also hope the hold will be lifted, but like everyone here, I don't know when or if. Aside from the allergic reaction, I, like everyone here, don't know if there are any other concerns related to PLX-PAD. I just get tired of hearing all the hype without any reflection towards the risks.
Only the FDA and PSTI know the truth.
lack of institutional ownership is due to the small market cap. Vast majority of institutions aren't allowed to acquire stocks with market cap under $500MIL, even less can acquire one under $200MIL
Each Pluristem Exec owns between 300K - 1.65MIL shares of PSTI stock either as a result of option grants or direct acquisition. Check "Major Holders" link on Yahoo Finance. Do not use management lack of ownership as a "caution" for investors to consider in approaching this stock.
CPRX: 17.4% MC 72M
CTIC: 19.0%, MC125M (Fidelity 6M shares)
ONTY 49.4%, MC 108M (JP Morgan 1.7M, First Manhattan 1.9M)
RGDX: 56.5%, 108M MC
BDSI: 65.7%, MC 177M (Fidelity, Deerfield, Baker Brothers all major holders)
Some no- bios:
KTOS: 68.8% 472 MC
FSYS: 49.7%, 380M MC
CCUR: 36.7%, MC 71M
BOLT: 53.3%, MC 155M
Shall I go on? I laugh when I hear people say these things. Nobody bought in with the last offering or have they since.
I'm not saying the hold won't be lifted, I'm only warning not to get too heavily attached here because of the lack of communication. Management is famous for this, except when they have a planned sale coming up, then the news hits the wires every other day. I am seriously concerned with the team here and since there are no major holders with any voting power, the board remains in tact. Zami needs to go back to the tech field and leave the therapeutics to the pros. Yaki is a lackey of Zami. Prather has bounced around a bit; in medicine, in finance, back to medicine (I will give him credit for his Harvard fellowship though, the only board member I have respect for). There may be, but I don't see any of their top PhD's involved with the successful launch of anything. They need a seasoned pro in their ranks, someone with influence and background with the big players. I will give them credit for their advisory boards as they did attract some good people there.
Anyway, good luck all.