If in fact he does milk the BMSN cow for everything it has to pay the costs of all that is required for the treatments to see them in P1/P2 with a subsequent purchase of Regen, and its intellectual property, by a BP (that is, after all what his plan dictates...to sell to a BP. At least the products. Some argue with me that he wouldn't sell Regen outright. But, I am not convinced of that. That is just my opinion) all the while lining his pockets to make out as a fatter cat than he presently is then we will be shafted. If the reverse merger happens as it was suggested by one of our investors, with the 500,000,000 share structure of Regen, will the % of shares we investors will be divvied be dictated by the 500 mill or the float after the reverse merger completes? That I don't know.

If the divvy is based on the latter, even with a 1/2 billion valuation based on the market potential of the two treatments (and that is very much plausible if you crunch the numbers within the worldwide oncology and AA market) what would we as investors see as what is issued to us? If the former, if he continues to use shares to fund as he has with BMSN, then the float will be minimal, comparatively speaking therefore our crumbs will be almost non existent. Again, comparatively speaking.

That said, if he is planning this (and he has done such before), there has to be something, somewhere in the laws that would allow for legal action against him. Yes? No? Maybe? I know investing is a risk...duh. But, to do the above should be beyond unethical. It should be criminal. At least it would be in PG land.

Comments? Opinions?