General Category > General Chat
Polarityte Inc / BioTech Discussion
kavan:
--- Quote from: GJ on October 06, 2017, 10:15:50 AM ---It means for every share of stock they have issued, they have lost $26 per those shares.
Look here: https://finance.google.com/finance?q=cool&ei=u_bWWcDtGoi_jAGZ-KCIAg
EPS: -26.30. They've issued 6.23million shares, which if you multiply that means they are losing a lot of money and are essentially worth zero by all traditional metrics. Many times speculators will keep the stocks from being zero, because if a drug is approved bioTechs can sore, or other times the company will buy back their own shares to keep a floor under the price.
The company's chart shows they've been around since 2001 at least. Stock was once $500, now it's $27 with negative earnings.
--- End quote ---
and just LOL to 'Cambridge investments' holding most of the stocks where THAT 'Cambridge' is in some corn field in Iowa and not where the smart people or movers and shakers in bio-engineering come from.
jusken:
The skepticism in here is good, I think a lot of this stuff is all marketing.
--- Quote from: kavan on October 06, 2017, 09:09:45 AM ---
Non or slow healing wounds are most problematic in people with medical conditions that limit blood supply. Hence a real 'breakthrough' would be something that helps the patients WITH conditions that limit good wound healing.
--- End quote ---
I think they're trying to go straight to market with what they have, which is regenerating skin tissue in people with burns/scars. They're starting later this year with burns/more extreme cases.
--- Quote from: kavan on October 06, 2017, 09:09:45 AM ---
With statement; 'IF clinically successful...', that seems to imply at this point in time, it has not demonstrated as such.
--- End quote ---
They have finished small and large animal trials successfully. Normally I wouldn't be too excited by this, as this is the stage most treatments get to, but since it's moving so fast and isn't a drug I'm more into it.
--- Quote from: kavan on October 06, 2017, 09:09:45 AM ---
and just LOL to 'Cambridge investments' holding most of the stocks where THAT 'Cambridge' is in some corn field in Iowa and not where the smart people or movers and shakers in bio-engineering come from.
--- End quote ---
(It's Utah btw :P) I could be wrong, but a good treatment doesn't have to come from anywhere in particular. From what I understand, large investors usually buy up the small start ups before you even hear about them - not everything starts in silicon valley. The video game company merger thing is a bit weird, but I always try to remember that a search company (Google) also just started a large Biotech company (Calico) and no one even batted an eye.
Again, this company might be nonsense - but the speed at which this company is moving is exciting to me. There's a surge of Biotech rallying this year (bubble?), so it's interesting to watch and there are a lot of possibilities. The problem in the past is how slowly things were going...
Lazlo:
Intersting. Will be very cool to see what happens to this.
GJ, thanks for the finance lesson. I need your guidance in such matters.
kavan:
Cambridge investments was listed as major share holder. (I'm from Cambridge and went to schools and colleges there.) So, I was trying to see where in Cambridge it was. Bio-tech firms are often kind of close to MIT campus on Kendall square side. I think the main company marketing their 'break through' is in Utah but the company called 'Cambridge' investments owning most of the shares is in Iowa.
It's like this: If a bio tech firm is actually in Camb. MA, they often have an MIT or MGH connection or at least there is a lot of overlap. Even if an investment firm in bio tech stuff is there. But the major share holder was in a corn field (well maybe an apple orchard) somewhere in Iowa.
Anyway, big name in tissue regeneration is Dr. Vacanti at MGH https://hsci.harvard.edu/people/joseph-vacanti-md. There are other names. But if you don't have way to know 'who's who' in that field, it's hard to make heads or tails of these start ups because a good marker is WHO is involved.
Not totally sure but I just tend to think what ever their 'proprietary breakthrough' is, is probably from PRIOR stem cell research where there are tons of papers on wound healing methods or just something they can claim as a breakthrough to investors who don't have much of a science background. Basics of wound healing is good debridement and MOIST healing. Add some stem cells or maybe some platelet rich plasma and your good to go. That said, not too sure this outfit is on the verge of any true breakthrough.
--- Quote from: jusken on October 06, 2017, 02:55:47 PM ---The skepticism in here is good, I think a lot of this stuff is all marketing.
I think they're trying to go straight to market with what they have, which is regenerating skin tissue in people with burns/scars. They're starting later this year with burns/more extreme cases.
They have finished small and large animal trials successfully. Normally I wouldn't be too excited by this, as this is the stage most treatments get to, but since it's moving so fast and isn't a drug I'm more into it.
(It's Utah btw :P) I could be wrong, but a good treatment doesn't have to come from anywhere in particular. From what I understand, large investors usually buy up the small start ups before you even hear about them - not everything starts in silicon valley. The video game company merger thing is a bit weird, but I always try to remember that a search company (Google) also just started a large Biotech company (Calico) and no one even batted an eye.
Again, this company might be nonsense - but the speed at which this company is moving is exciting to me. There's a surge of Biotech rallying this year (bubble?), so it's interesting to watch and there are a lot of possibilities. The problem in the past is how slowly things were going...
--- End quote ---
GJ:
I'm going to split this thread since it's going way off topic.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version