Replicel

[JJJJrS]

Originally Posted by ccmethinning

If it worked well, would they really need to retract all the "billion dollar cure" and similar headlines? No, they wouldn't, because if it worked well it in all liklihood would be a "billion dollar cure." I think Iron_Man even conceded that it might show some results in the form of thin vellus hairs. But the results have to be very underwhelming (not nonexistent) to go out of their way and retract those statements.

Doesn't look good at all.

I'd love to see Replicel succeed just as much as anybody else here but all signs seem to be indicating otherwise. Whether it's the unnecessary and shameless paid promotions, waiting until the very last possible moment to release results, not mentioning anything about efficacy in the annual report, and now finally this retraction. I think I've lost hope in them now.

I really hope I get proven wrong and on Monday they show pictures with obvious regrowth/increased hair count, but at the moment, I'm very, very skeptical.

[ccmethinning]

Originally Posted by lpenergy

This is going to be interesting to watch on Monday. They opted to not include any mention of the results in their annual report. I am hoping that their lawyers stepped in and told them to issue the statement to be on the safeside. The only problem is why didn't the lawyers step in and do this earlier if they felt like certain publications were overly optimistic.

The NBT piece said they expected the stock to be $5.25 in early May. Well, maybe with the results they have in hand, there is no way the stock price is going to get there.

The timing is way too good to just be lawyers being precautionary. Results are widely believed to be released Monday. For the last 2 weeks they promote the crap out of their stock for $338,000. Since then, the share price has risen almost $1. Now, afterhours on the Friday before the Monday they are presumed to release the results, after the price has been inflated, they now decide to cover their ass with some legal lingo. The damage has been done, hundreds, maybe thousands, of retail investors have been sucked in. Now they are going to drop the bomb on Monday, and be completely free of wrongdoing because they have "retracted" the statements.

[NeedHairASAP]

Originally Posted by 2020

this announcement was probably made just to avoid legal troubles....

anyways, I refuse to believe that after a decade of work Replicel will fail completely. Even that paper that "Iron Man" keep showing us only claims that they probably won't be able to grow BRAND NEW FOLLICLES.... there is still hope for diffuse thinners and low norwoods. Half the participants in Replicel's study are women so we'll see how they respond...

sorry for your loss 2020....

[hairysituation]

Originally Posted by ccmethinning

The timing is way too good to just be lawyers being precautionary. Results are widely believed to be released Monday. For the last 2 weeks they promote the crap out of their stock for $338,000. Since then, the share price has risen almost $1. Now, afterhours on the Friday before the Monday they are presumed to release the results, after the price has been inflated, they now decide to cover their ass with some legal lingo. The damage has been done, hundreds, maybe thousands, of retail investors have been sucked in. Now they are going to drop the bomb on Monday, and be completely free of wrongdoing because they have "retracted" the statements.

I agree that it sound suspisous, but let us all do ourselves a favour and wait until the trial release. If the results are bad, I will be excited over Iron Man's knowledge. But let's wait and see, and stop speculating.

[Kirby_]

Originally Posted by ccmethinning

http://www.stockhouse.com/News/USRel...aspx?n=8493113

Use that link. All these stock promoters come out with this lofty language, the stock price runs up, now, just days before release they say "may cause investors to lose their entire investment in the Company."

Uh oh. They're ****ed. Another Intercytex...

[lpenergy]

I took a quick pass at the MD&A while I was at work, but there were a couple of things that I picked up on.

It seems that they have modified the Efficacy Endpoint testing for phase IIa testing. In their MD&A report for 9/30/2011, they indicated that they would test for efficacy at 6 months as a secondary endpoint and release the results in spring of 2012. They would continue testing the patients at 12 month and 24 month endpoints for safety.

In the most recent MD&A, they have stated that "Analysis of efficacy will also be studied at 9, 12 and 24 months."

This is new and different. A 9th month efficacy testing to my knowledge has never been discussed previously. So, are they telegraphing that after 6 months time, results may not have been sufficient and so they want to continue to test for efficacy at these additional endpoints?

[lpenergy]

For those of you who haven't reviewed their report, it can be found at:

http://www.sedar.com/FindCompanyDocuments.do


1) They say they "we continue to perform pre‐clinical
research to improve the production and delivery of our product." This will be a question for an interview as to why this is necessary.

2) They have included language that broadens their horizons so to speak beyond hair. Under Intellectual Property, it now says "We are
developing a diverse portfolio of intellectual property for the use of stem cells in the treatment of hair loss, as well as other medical conditions." Later it says, "and the growth and use of these stem cells for the treatment of a variety of medical conditions (including hair loss)." In my opion, this also does not bode well for Monday.

[PvH]

Originally Posted by NeedHairASAP

sorry for your loss 2020....

thats funny haha

Originally Posted by Kirby_

Uh oh. They're ****ed. Another Intercytex...

fool me once.. ahh **** it

[WashedOut]

I don't see why they would go on with phase II if their results are that bad. If they won't get funding then they might as well shut it down now but they must have something that they think investors will see as worth pursuing at the least. This is covering your ass from lawsuits because there is no guarantee the price will go up to a certain amount regardless of the results.

[NeedHairASAP]

Originally Posted by lpenergy

This is new and different. A 9th month efficacy testing to my knowledge has never been discussed previously. So, are they telegraphing that after 6 months time, results may not have been sufficient and so they want to continue to test for efficacy at these additional endpoints?

I think, sufficient or not, they would be interested in the specific time series (6,9, etc) data sets you mention