Replicel

[UK_]

I think everyone needs to calm down. Replicel was most likely obligated to cover themselves from legal action because a bunch of these companies that were promoting them made unrealistic stock predictions. I don't think this says anything about whether they've failed or succeeded in the clinic. Even if they have great results, what happens if the stock price doesn't meet the predictions that the promoters made? Investors might be pissed and go after them. So, they needed to play it safe and make the release. If they failed, what would be the point of this release? The company would screwed anyway...

Maybe this is wrong, but, i'm waiting till monday before getting all worked up.

All true Alchemist. Corporate legality when making statements about stock prices is very important lol retractions like this can be anything from an error about timescale to a sentence the legal team or the company simply doesnt like. That isnt to say the treatment has failed, but making statements to potential shareholders as in: "this company claims to have the cure for male pattern baldness" may raise some legal issues with the company itself if backs are not covered lol.

Anyway, as always, time shall tell.

[NotBelievingIt]

I never read the retraction fully until just now.

My guess is that RepliCel gave the same theory on potential valuation to the pumpers that I did earlier in another thread.