Replicel

[NeedHairASAP]

so... they've been analyzing "results" for 2 months, 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, that makes sense.....

[Horseshoe]

It may not look good at this time but I will NEVER GIVE UP the fight!

The stock closed down 20% but it was almost down 42% during the trading day. I don't mind loosing some money if the end result is a effective treatment for MPB. But I will be greatly disappointed if I loose both. All we can do is to wait and see what the news will bring. We are all tired of waiting another 5 yrs, but another few days I can wait...

[Kirby_]

Hmm, I'm at this point suspecting that it turns out to not be objectively a failure, just still a long way off from being anywhere near a 'cure'. Perhaps.

[lpenergy]

Ideas on the Delay:

If it were as simple as saying that no new hairs grew in the injection site compared to the Placebo that would be fairly straight forward to report. Trying to figure out why is obviously the hard part. Even if you were unsure exactly why hairs did not grow, a few additional days of research probably wouldn’t be able to answer that question. One would probably just come out with the results, and try to spin as good as possible. I don’t think you would delay for this. It just doesn’t make sense. There is nothing to count, nothing to report, so stick to the original timeline and try to put a positive spin on it that are going to try to rework some things.

Unless Replicel received a sealed envelope with the results hidden to them until days ago, and they had absolutely no idea what those results were until then, needing more time to compile their results seems to not make any sense.

Another possible explanation for the delay would be them trying solve or explain the results. For example, did they create new follicles or only rejuvenate existing ones. Again, possible, but I find it difficult that this analysis could be solved in a couple of additional days.

Is it possible that Replicel was noticing improved results in the months following 6 month timeframe, and therefore were trying to get as many patients in the 9+months back in as possible in order to show a trend to accompany the 6 month results and are trying to analyze these? That could explain the delay. Or, is it possible that one of the patients was really showing visible hair improvement, and they were holding off on getting that “final” photograph? Either of these could be positive delay reasons.

[PvH]

i applaud you for you efforts, i really do. but what's the point of speculating? even if you can pin point the exact cause, it can't be confirmed by anyone except someone with inside knowledge. now if anyone has some leaked info, then it's worth digging into.

[john2399]

Originally Posted by lpenergy

Ideas on the Delay:

If it were as simple as saying that no new hairs grew in the injection site compared to the Placebo that would be fairly straight forward to report. Trying to figure out why is obviously the hard part. Even if you were unsure exactly why hairs did not grow, a few additional days of research probably wouldn’t be able to answer that question. One would probably just come out with the results, and try to spin as good as possible. I don’t think you would delay for this. It just doesn’t make sense. There is nothing to count, nothing to report, so stick to the original timeline and try to put a positive spin on it that are going to try to rework some things.

Unless Replicel received a sealed envelope with the results hidden to them until days ago, and they had absolutely no idea what those results were until then, needing more time to compile their results seems to not make any sense.

Another possible explanation for the delay would be them trying solve or explain the results. For example, did they create new follicles or only rejuvenate existing ones. Again, possible, but I find it difficult that this analysis could be solved in a couple of additional days.

Is it possible that Replicel was noticing improved results in the months following 6 month timeframe, and therefore were trying to get as many patients in the 9+months back in as possible in order to show a trend to accompany the 6 month results and are trying to analyze these? That could explain the delay. Or, is it possible that one of the patients was really showing visible hair improvement, and they were holding off on getting that “final” photograph? Either of these could be positive delay reasons.

It's not even a delay yet...after wedsenday would be a real delay

[ccmethinning]

Originally Posted by john2399

It's not even a delay yet...after wedsenday would be a real delay

Yes it is. They have said late-April for a long time, including in their 20-f. Tomorrow is May 1. Totally irresponsible.

[john2399]

Originally Posted by ccmethinning

Yes it is. They have said late-April for a long time, including in their 20-f. Tomorrow is May 1. Totally irresponsible.

well we can't cry about it...all we can do is stay positive..people on this board are all negative doubters who assume the results are bad.

[VictimOfDHT]

They know what the results are. They probably have had the results for a long time. They must be enjoying the panic and speculations they're creating right now. Bitches.

[john2399]

Originally Posted by VictimOfDHT

They know what the results are. They probably have had the results for a long time. They must be enjoying the panic and speculations they're creating right now. Bitches.

Probably but hopefully they have to count so many hairs its taking a long time lol a person can dream