Replicel

[Pate]

Can you please show where you got the information from about the price? All Replicel has said about the price is that it would be compatable and then some, compared to the hair transplant prices. And why would you have to go there every second year? Can you please explain your reasoning?

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.

[Kiwi]

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.

Speaking of Histogen.... WTF! Where are they?!?

[Pate]

Speaking of Histogen.... WTF! Where are they?!?

Didn't they start their next trial around January? The eight injections followed by another eight at six weeks.

So we might get a three-month update from them pretty soon too.

[hairysituation]

I actually believe more in Histogen than Replicel, at least temporary. They have actually showed real results with their trials. So for a guy like me with a NW2, I guess I can archive a great result with this kind of results:

http://www.histogen.com/images/hsc.jpg

[clandestine]

Didn't Histogen achieve something like 70% regrowth at 12 month mark?

EDIT: Nevermind, poster above me just linked to a picture that shows this. Doesn't look terribly significant to me for some reason, though (based on those two photos).

[Pate]

Didn't Histogen achieve something like 70% regrowth at 12 month mark?

EDIT: Nevermind, poster above me just linked to a picture that shows this. Doesn't look terribly significant to me for some reason, though (based on those two photos).

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.

[Maradona]

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 believe it will cost 20k for a full head of hair that's what spencer said.

I'll take spencer's word over this full head of hair stock broker anyday .

[cleverusername]

I believe it will cost 20k for a full head of hair that's what spencer said.

I'll take spencer's word over this full head of hair stock broker anyday .

20k huh? I guess that's a decent price.

[elvispresley]

20k huh? I guess that's a decent price.

did spencer do the interview pre result with replicel?
if not when is the interview?
thx

[cleverusername]

did spencer do the interview pre result with replicel?
if not when is the interview?
thx

I don't think he did it yet man and I'm not sure when the interview is going to happen. Hopefully soon.