Replicel
Collapse
X
-
-
Why isn't there a limit to how much you can lose? Please educate me, I'm interested in trading.Comment
-
On that one patient they got 70% yes. And on another patient about the same. They were the best results. But the average was about 20% regrowth if I recall correctly. Which means a decent number of them had less than 20% growth.Comment
-
The most recognized is called short selling.
You borrow someone elses stock and sell it for $X.
But at some point you have to buy the stock back, to cover the short. If the stock price ends up going up, you then fork out of your own pocket the difference.
Think of the actions of short selling as the exact opposite of buying low first and selling high second. When you buy low and sell high, you pocket that difference. So if you can short the stock and sell first, you want to sell high and then buy back low.
So the stock could go to 3 times what you sold it for, so you would have to fork over, from your own cash, 2*$X. But maybe the stock went to 100 times, or 500? Or 1000? The price of the stock knows no ceiling, but there is a floor of $0. So if you bet the price is going up, but it goes to zero, you only lose $X. But if you short it, you could lose anywhere from $0 to $infinite if the price goes up.
The other method of betting against a stock is through the use of options. I do not believe any stock that is "Over The Counter" has options available, plus the market has to be very "liquid" (alot of shares trading hands everyday) for options to even be, well, an option.Comment
-
The 15k figure came from the stockbroker's report on Replicel that was posted a few pages back. It was the proposed revenue figure for Replicel, which would mean the cost of the procedure would be significantly more expensive because the doctor or clinic that administers it needs to take their cut too.
But I think it was just a plucked-out-of-the-air figure, not based on anything official from Replicel. To be honest the whole valuation thing in that report was pretty lame but broker clients want to see hard numbers, not just potential, so they had to come up with a valuation metric.
The reason for having to go back is because it's likely it will take multiple treatments to achieve full density. Even if they achieve a 100% increase in hair count (which is more than they are looking for), if you have 10% terminal hairs left then you will only have 20% of your original terminal hair density after the procedure.
There's no reason for it to be two years though. Six weeks to three months is the sort of timeframe they are talking about for repeat treatments of Histogen.
I'll take spencer's word over this full head of hair stock broker anyday .Comment
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
people stop getting excited about this "pre results interview". you will hear nothing new.
he simply cannot relate anything about the results of the trial
It is against securities law for him to do anything of the sort.Comment
-
However if Spencer doesn't have time to do both, it's fine, he still does too much for us.Comment
-
i'm lost with the whole countdown to the details of Phase 1 (or wherever they are up to), i presumed (thanks to Replicel) that we'd have some info in about 5 days from now (26.03.12-31.03.12) but they now say middle of April, for a company that is spending/'investing' millions on their 'development' i can't help but feel a little down on this.
No news is good news is rubbish, i think they are making themselves look a little disorganised, if they can't give the public a date and stick to that date to release trial results, then i doubt anything will come of this.
Don't knock me, it's mpo and i was all for a result from these guys a few months ago and jumped on the hype bandwagon with a lot of others, but now the classic;-
'gives us a few more days, we do have the amazing results but please give us a few more days, erm lets say another month ...or so!'Comment
-
i'm lost with the whole countdown to the details of Phase 1 (or wherever they are up to), i presumed (thanks to Replicel) that we'd have some info in about 5 days from now (26.03.12-31.03.12) but they now say middle of April, for a company that is spending/'investing' millions on their 'development' i can't help but feel a little down on this.
No news is good news is rubbish, i think they are making themselves look a little disorganised, if they can't give the public a date and stick to that date to release trial results, then i doubt anything will come of this.
Don't knock me, it's mpo and i was all for a result from these guys a few months ago and jumped on the hype bandwagon with a lot of others, but now the classic;-
'gives us a few more days, we do have the amazing results but please give us a few more days, erm lets say another month ...or so!'
they posted this on March 3:
Data from Phase I of #RepliCel’s clinical trial is expected to be available in late-April, 2012.Comment
-
Really. It they can't absolutely predict every possible thing that might happen, they should just pack it in.Comment
-
I know what's been posted!
I've been keeping a close eye on Replicel, they have previously said results to be annouunced end of March 2012 and now it's middle of April 2012 for results, that's a delay.
I'm with all you guys wishing this to come to fruition i really do, really really do.
...just thinking why another 3 or 4 weeks? ...and so, then, in 3 or 4 weeks, we're in May.
Come on Replicel, shake the World up!
and one more point, if this treatment was to produce amazing results and was available tomorrow, who really has the money to get it done, on this forum who out there has a stash of cash waiting to get this done, really?
Some guys will need another few years to get the finance together, so in a way creating their own delay.Comment
Comment