Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me
The Company
  • Page:
  • 1

TOPIC: Ownership basis for different scenario´s

Ownership basis for different scenario´s 07 Feb 2018 08:29 #11166

  • fas
  • fas's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • May the fat be with you
  • Posts: 3332
  • Thank you received: 1114
Hedge already "threatened" to come with some brainstorming on different future scenario´s :grin: - I think that is a good idea. As a guidance, I wanted to show some numbers, which could be the BASIS for these scenario´s, which concerns us most- ownership of Cytori, since that basically determines everything.

To me that should look like this at present-


Of course- there could be many other individuals and Companies (like Allied Finance) that could be involved and are presently still in the dark, but could appear in the limelight.
One should be clear, that the RO structure was an open invitation by Cytori for third parties to take a big stake in the Company and that is just what happened (I know this is a repeat statement- it will come again surely)

Key thing on the events ongoing- of course is - friendly or hostile?

Time will tell :bye:
Attachments:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Board moderator and Site-owner. I still regret the day I started analysing the prospects of MacroPore (now Cytori) back in 2004- a left-over from the tech-bubble at that time from the century change in my portfolio- and became addicted to Cytori´s fat cell technology. :cry:

Ownership basis for different scenario´s 07 Feb 2018 08:50 #11167

  • rodney.strongg
  • rodney.strongg's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1329
  • Thank you received: 19

fas wrote: Hedge already "threatened" to come with some brainstorming on different future scenario´s :grin: - I think that is a good idea. As a guidance, I wanted to show some numbers, which could be the BASIS for these scenario´s, which concerns us most- ownership of Cytori, since that basically determines everything.

To me that should look like this at present-



Of course- there could be many other individuals and Companies (like Allied Finance) that could be involved and are presently still in the dark, but could appear in the limelight.
One should be clear, that the RO structure was an open invitation by Cytori for third parties to take a big stake in the Company and that is just what happened (I know this is a repeat statement- it will come again surely)

Key thing on the events ongoing- of course is - friendly or hostile?

Time will tell :bye:


Initially CYTX portrayed the RO as a way for existing S/H's to avoid dilution by fully participating in the RO - theoretically, the existing S/H's could have exercised their Rights into the 10,000 B's (plus warrants) - obviously, there was not enough participation and the RO had to be opened to new S/H's - it would seem that Maxim could have controlled the amount of individual participation by new S/H's but seemingly chose to let some such as Swissquote & Postfinance (and perhaps others) establish unusually high percentage interests - intentional???

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Ownership basis for different scenario´s 07 Feb 2018 09:05 #11168

  • fas
  • fas's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • May the fat be with you
  • Posts: 3332
  • Thank you received: 1114
Key thing is also the market capitalization at present, which is a mere 20-25 Mio at present, thanks to successfully managing a Company into oblivia and consistently not generating meaningful revenues. As Franshei rightly stated there might still be "friends of the Cytori technology" who need simply some financial support of folks with some pocket money, to whom these peanuts could be quite appealing.

To me the key assets are-

1. the European IIS studies- Scleradec II is not done by Cytori, so likely will be a success, but the main assets in this category are likely in Poland where several studies should be close to completion and which are only known to insiders.

2.the Japanese device approvals and upcoming ANDRESU IIS study completion

3. the Azaya asset

4. Any possible continuation of the STAR study.

all in all - in my view double digit - maybe even triple digit more value than the present market cap. :whistle:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Board moderator and Site-owner. I still regret the day I started analysing the prospects of MacroPore (now Cytori) back in 2004- a left-over from the tech-bubble at that time from the century change in my portfolio- and became addicted to Cytori´s fat cell technology. :cry:

Ownership basis for different scenario´s 07 Feb 2018 09:22 #11169

  • rodney.strongg
  • rodney.strongg's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1329
  • Thank you received: 19

fas wrote: Key thing is also the market capitalization at present, which is a mere 20-25 Mio at present, thanks to successfully managing a Company into oblivia and consistently not generating meaningful revenues. As Franshei rightly stated there might still be "friends of the Cytori technology" who need simply some financial support of folks with some pocket money, to whom these peanuts could be quite appealing.

To me the key assets are-

1. the European IIS studies- Scleradec II is not done by Cytori, so likely will be a success, but the main assets in this category are likely in Poland where several studies should be close to completion and which are only known to insiders.

2.the Japanese device approvals and upcoming ANDRESU IIS study completion

3. the Azaya asset

4. Any possible continuation of the STAR study.

all in all - in my view double digit - maybe even triple digit more value than the present market cap. :whistle:


When you refer to the "present market cap", I assume that you mean the current market price times the 82 million fully diluted shares, or approximately 29 million - also, by triple digit, do you mean a 100% increase to 58 million, or hopefully something greater?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Ownership basis for different scenario´s 07 Feb 2018 10:24 #11170

  • fas
  • fas's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • May the fat be with you
  • Posts: 3332
  • Thank you received: 1114

rodney.strongg wrote: Initially CYTX portrayed the RO as a way for existing S/H's to avoid dilution by fully participating in the RO - theoretically, the existing S/H's could have exercised their Rights into the 10,000 B's (plus warrants) - obviously, there was not enough participation and the RO had to be opened to new S/H's - it would seem that Maxim could have controlled the amount of individual participation by new S/H's but seemingly chose to let some such as Swissquote & Postfinance (and perhaps others) establish unusually high percentage interests - intentional???


Of course intentional. A "usual" RO is simply 1 subscription right for each RO share. Here you could get 1000 for one subscription right (i.e. each owned share). Ludicrous.
I have not written to Cytori in many, many years for obvious reasons. This time I did and voiced my displeasure. Of course, Girao was travelling, but after several mails back and forth, we agreed he would call when he had time. Of course, he never did.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Board moderator and Site-owner. I still regret the day I started analysing the prospects of MacroPore (now Cytori) back in 2004- a left-over from the tech-bubble at that time from the century change in my portfolio- and became addicted to Cytori´s fat cell technology. :cry:

Ownership basis for different scenario´s 07 Feb 2018 10:36 #11171

  • fas
  • fas's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • May the fat be with you
  • Posts: 3332
  • Thank you received: 1114

rodney.strongg wrote: When you refer to the "present market cap", I assume that you mean the current market price times the 82 million fully diluted shares, or approximately 29 million - also, by triple digit, do you mean a 100% increase to 58 million, or hopefully something greater?


No I simply took the 60-65 mio at 1/3 of a dollar - the warrants still should bring cash. By triple digit I meant 100x i.e. 2-2,5 Bio, which is still my (sole) view of the disruptive tech. I believe Juno went for something like that. I believe that still is fair value, when managed rightly. However- I also believe that in case of a hostile take-over shareholders will have to settle for 60-80 cents.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Board moderator and Site-owner. I still regret the day I started analysing the prospects of MacroPore (now Cytori) back in 2004- a left-over from the tech-bubble at that time from the century change in my portfolio- and became addicted to Cytori´s fat cell technology. :cry:

Ownership basis for different scenario´s 07 Feb 2018 11:34 #11172

  • rodney.strongg
  • rodney.strongg's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1329
  • Thank you received: 19

fas wrote:

rodney.strongg wrote: When you refer to the "present market cap", I assume that you mean the current market price times the 82 million fully diluted shares, or approximately 29 million - also, by triple digit, do you mean a 100% increase to 58 million, or hopefully something greater?


No I simply took the 60-65 mio at 1/3 of a dollar - the warrants still should bring cash. By triple digit I meant 100x i.e. 2-2,5 Bio, which is still my (sole) view of the disruptive tech. I believe Juno went for something like that. I believe that still is fair value, when managed rightly. However- I also believe that in case of a hostile take-over shareholders will have to settle for 60-80 cents.


The difference between your estimate of true value (even at a lower %) versus a hostile takeover price is so great that it would be illogical for current management to encourage or accept the possibility of the latter happening - nevertheless, the current Swiss ownership plus the potential of other additional major RO ownership (along with the "coincidental" BOD changes) seem to suggest that is a possibility - hopefully, that is not the case and that there is a much better ending to this unfolding saga.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Ownership basis for different scenario´s 07 Feb 2018 11:57 #11173

  • fas
  • fas's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • May the fat be with you
  • Posts: 3332
  • Thank you received: 1114

rodney.strongg wrote: The difference between your estimate of true value (even at a lower %) versus a hostile takeover price is so great that it would be illogical for current management to encourage or accept the possibility of the latter happening - nevertheless, the current Swiss ownership plus the potential of other additional major RO ownership (along with the "coincidental" BOD changes) seem to suggest that is a possibility - hopefully, that is not the case and that there is a much better ending to this unfolding saga.


I have "dropped" the word "collusion" several times the past week. Do not think that the BOD of Cytori have ever represented shareholders. They simply have not and never will.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Board moderator and Site-owner. I still regret the day I started analysing the prospects of MacroPore (now Cytori) back in 2004- a left-over from the tech-bubble at that time from the century change in my portfolio- and became addicted to Cytori´s fat cell technology. :cry:

Ownership basis for different scenario´s 07 Feb 2018 12:23 #11174

  • rodney.strongg
  • rodney.strongg's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1329
  • Thank you received: 19

fas wrote:

rodney.strongg wrote: The difference between your estimate of true value (even at a lower %) versus a hostile takeover price is so great that it would be illogical for current management to encourage or accept the possibility of the latter happening - nevertheless, the current Swiss ownership plus the potential of other additional major RO ownership (along with the "coincidental" BOD changes) seem to suggest that is a possibility - hopefully, that is not the case and that there is a much better ending to this unfolding saga.


I have "dropped" the word "collusion" several times the past week. Do not think that the BOD of Cytori have ever represented shareholders. They simply have not and never will.


We now essentially have a new BOD with Rickey gone - the question is what was the real reason for his departure.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Ownership basis for different scenario´s 07 Feb 2018 16:43 #11175

  • myownhedgefund
  • myownhedgefund's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 2820
  • Thank you received: 201
Thanks for getting the ball rolling here Fas.
Lots of general market action that had my attention of late.
Some interesting action on good companies. Hedge likely, LOL.
I did start some serious thinking this weekend but creating a Monday shopping list was just too strong a pull for me.
I will add that the 3 major averages here, DJIA, S&P and NASDAQ all finished below their 50 dma's today. While news can push markets either way the suggestion that more work is needed shouldnt be ignored imho !

OK, back to the topic at hand.
To me, there are two main scenarios.
Scenario #1
Major Control Change

Scenario #2
More of the same

Fas got he ball rolling with #1 and that is the more interesting one for speculation imho.
This too can be further broken down to two main themes and two different promoters of those themes.
1. The CC, EU, Arabian axis...major promoter Fas
2. The drug company partnership vs take over plan with a sprinkle of China added...major promoter franshei

If either of these play out or something else comes along I think the realization should be that we have already likely been completely marginalized.
What we do know for sure is there are 2 new major holdings now that represent a large block of shares. As was pointed out at the start of this thread...the % of ownership represented and the two "related" holders qualifies for 13D's filed vs 13G's imho.
Are there other players already in the wings or how can more control be cheaply be obtained ?
So much has transpired in terms of low PPS action I believe most of the weak hands are out either from tax loss selling or just giving up. That would mean new action would be required to shake loose major shares.
1. Unfriendly FDA news
2. A request for a HUGE increase in the number of outstanding shares ( Should come soon. Certainly enough to cover the warrant conversion and enough for another raise of some sort later this year)
3. Unexpected bad news...another trial failure, sales in Japan...who knows. Cytori and bad news has always seemed to be on a first name basis. :(

Fas' theme always held the most intrigue.
Why smart money would want CC is a unknown to me but he could always be marginalized at a later date once the prize is obtained. We know the Celactive website once offered some interesting claims and there was some big EU names that Fas was familiar with. We also know shareholder destruction has been on a relentless tear since his departure...although I also blame the debt that was put on the company as a major flaw allowed by the trifecta of doom.
There could be other players that TAP Advisors brought in as well.
The 11/28/17, 8k I posted the other day talking about control of parts or all of the company that posted right after the RO was completed now seems quite important if we consider a control change of some sort is coming.
If it is full control, the PPS wont be much. I initially thought $1.00 as a bid with a follow-up $1.10 ( the PPS pre STAR failure) or even $1.20 ( the speculative high pre STAR failure) as best cases. I quickly changed my mind thinking those were too high. Don't forget they will still have to capitalize the new company and they will want the get the shares as cheaply as possible.Some sort of new dilemma that lowers the PPS would allow for Fas' pricing to make more sense on a cash deal basis. Although, not necessary. The warrant cashless conversion shouldn't be ignored either imho.

If franshei is more on target and a deal comes in shares of another company maybe the $1.00 to $1.20 would still have some legs. At least in such a deal one could hold these shares and have some for of participation going forward. I would suggest that what we have seen so far isn't leaning that way...but I wont completely discount it.

I am afraid that a multi-billion market cap is a long ago dream at even I though was a possibility years ago. Note the word POSSIBILITY !!! LOL. A lot had to happen right.

I hope I covered what I wanted to say here for scenario #1. I never got my chance to make a outline this weekend.
I will try to address scenario #2, "more of the same", soon.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Ownership basis for different scenario´s 07 Feb 2018 17:24 #11176

  • rodney.strongg
  • rodney.strongg's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1329
  • Thank you received: 19
HF, as someone with a minor stake if any, I am not sure why you make such an effort re CYTX (perhaps some loyalty to Fas and the past) - in any event, it is much appreciated even if you and I do not always agree. Thanks.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Ownership basis for different scenario´s 07 Feb 2018 19:01 #11177

  • myownhedgefund
  • myownhedgefund's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 2820
  • Thank you received: 201
Scenario #2
More of the same.

I believe this case also has some legs.
We have had large players in the past.
Gagnon and Sabby immediately come to mind as large holders in the past only to see the shares go.
If there was a buyout soon...why tip your hand ?
If there was a buyout soon and the shares were largely obtained via the RO, why did Maxim pump the stock in early January ? The spike in the PPS attracted attention of the momentum players but their success only went so far as supply was their to meet them at pricing that was acceptable the to faceless traders....let alone the momo players create plenty of churn themselves.
History is certainly on the side of "more of the same"...a RO price gets negotiated down to where profits are almost certainly assured and the wash, rinse cycle can continue. It explains the help the necessary filings would provide as well...Hmmm...large players...something must be happening...I better buy...and the PPS responds.

Why would someone want to own this ?
To me, the failure of large studies and the regulatory process of most countries (nod to Japan being better) has been a HUGE mitigating factor to any value small studies may have shown. There is much work, which of course means cash needed, to get this moving in the right direction for serious value to be created.

"More of the same" also allows for the mystery of our conjectures to play nicely for management allowing precious time for something, almost anything to happen before the next financing happens.

#####
There is a 3rd possibility which I like and if I were a more serious player be they way I would think about it.
I guess I will call it Scenario #3 or "Win, Win"
Investment has one main purpose for most serious players...to make a smaller pile of cash into a bigger pile of cash.
In the "win win" scenario perhaps the players are interested in the tech but would be just as happy to make a decent profit on a flip. They have taken their stake after a through inside look. The PPS is cheap and the company desperately needs them but their are still irons in the fire for the company that could create a relatively decent profit and also allow the wash rinse cycle to likely continue. Namely Azaya or FDA PMA allowance or something more quietly being discussed. The stock moves with volume, you collect your profit and "win".
or
Nothing happens but "more of the same" and the PPS falls and BK is again threatened.
They swop in as saviours (unless your a long term holder) with a bid, you get at least something and they own the tech quite cheaply that they can, either market to a larger player or develop themselves.

All 3 scenarios are pure speculation of course and posted to promote some thoughtful dialogue among lodge members until the March call.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Ownership basis for different scenario´s 07 Feb 2018 20:21 #11178

  • rodney.strongg
  • rodney.strongg's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1329
  • Thank you received: 19

myownhedgefund wrote: Scenario #2
More of the same.

I believe this case also has some legs.
We have had large players in the past.
Gagnon and Sabby immediately come to mind as large holders in the past only to see the shares go.
If there was a buyout soon...why tip your hand ?
If there was a buyout soon and the shares were largely obtained via the RO, why did Maxim pump the stock in early January ? The spike in the PPS attracted attention of the momentum players but their success only went so far as supply was their to meet them at pricing that was acceptable the to faceless traders....let alone the momo players create plenty of churn themselves.
History is certainly on the side of "more of the same"...a RO price gets negotiated down to where profits are almost certainly assured and the wash, rinse cycle can continue. It explains the help the necessary filings would provide as well...Hmmm...large players...something must be happening...I better buy...and the PPS responds.

Why would someone want to own this ?
To me, the failure of large studies and the regulatory process of most countries (nod to Japan being better) has been a HUGE mitigating factor to any value small studies may have shown. There is much work, which of course means cash needed, to get this moving in the right direction for serious value to be created.

"More of the same" also allows for the mystery of our conjectures to play nicely for management allowing precious time for something, almost anything to happen before the next financing happens.

#####
There is a 3rd possibility which I like and if I were a more serious player be they way I would think about it.
I guess I will call it Scenario #3 or "Win, Win"
Investment has one main purpose for most serious players...to make a smaller pile of cash into a bigger pile of cash.
In the "win win" scenario perhaps the players are interested in the tech but would be just as happy to make a decent profit on a flip. They have taken their stake after a through inside look. The PPS is cheap and the company desperately needs them but their are still irons in the fire for the company that could create a relatively decent profit and also allow the wash rinse cycle to likely continue. Namely Azaya or FDA PMA allowance or something more quietly being discussed. The stock moves with volume, you collect your profit and "win".
or
Nothing happens but "more of the same" and the PPS falls and BK is again threatened.
They swop in as saviours (unless your a long term holder) with a bid, you get at least something and they own the tech quite cheaply that they can, either market to a larger player or develop themselves.

All 3 scenarios are pure speculation of course and posted to promote some thoughtful dialogue among lodge members until the March call.


All reasonable conjectures by HF - certainly there is no question that the history of CYTX supports the "lose" side for the long-term investor on this MB - having said that, the scenario this time is so unconventional from the past (including Rickey's coincidental departure) that my gut feel is telling me that this time will be different, most likely not to the high range that Fas posted as fair value, but certainly with the potential of $5+ per share in the not too distant future. JMHO

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Ownership basis for different scenario´s 08 Feb 2018 13:25 #11183

  • fas
  • fas's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • May the fat be with you
  • Posts: 3332
  • Thank you received: 1114
Thanks Hedge for your deliberations- they are most welcome.

Let me summarize my understanding of your 3 scenario´s-

The first- my Celactive/Calhoun collaboration scenario- to you that has the most legs but you do not understand why smart money would support Calhoun. I figure it has little to do with Calhoun besides his understanding and passion about the science. The UAE (or Switzerland as a matter of fact) do not haveregulatory hurdles like the US or EU. Influence counts more and Big Pharma has less to say there, so perfect for a disruptive platform technology like CCT.
The second- general take-over scenario´s by competitors or tech believers- yeah- that is always possible, but not necessarily explains the show up of the two Swiss investors.

The third- that those Swiss investors showed up, because they see value appreciation- just being passive investors.

I will now turn to possible INTENTIONS of the Swiss- but most likely tomorrow.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Board moderator and Site-owner. I still regret the day I started analysing the prospects of MacroPore (now Cytori) back in 2004- a left-over from the tech-bubble at that time from the century change in my portfolio- and became addicted to Cytori´s fat cell technology. :cry:

Ownership basis for different scenario´s 08 Feb 2018 15:09 #11189

  • myownhedgefund
  • myownhedgefund's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 2820
  • Thank you received: 201
Great...look forward to it Fas.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Ownership basis for different scenario´s 08 Feb 2018 15:37 #11191

  • rodney.strongg
  • rodney.strongg's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1329
  • Thank you received: 19
Fas, I also look forward to your addressing the INTENTIONS - major question in my mind is why did the Swiss choose to convert so quickly if not to sell, yet to date we are only aware of the "relatively" minor Swissquote sale - however, both Swiss owners may be looking for much higher prices than we have seen to date (obviously such prices have not been helped by the huge overall mkt. sell-off).

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Page:
  • 1
Time to create page: 0.955 seconds

Copyright Information

Copyright Fas Kuiters © 2016 young-foxes.com. All Rights Reserved.
This page is made with Joomla CMS and its various templates designed by Fas Kuiters with the excellent Themler tool.

 

 

Shared Spreadsheet Links

DOV´s Revised Projections for the Periods 2017 until 2020

Shareble link : HERE

Fas Kuiters Websites