1. I think this type of financing is a last resort and it’s either take it or financially the company cannot continue to operate. I don’t think uplisting will solve this problem. We need money to operate and the only way to stop using “toxic” funding is to get funding through lympro revenue, grants, or sale of parts or all of the diagnostic division. Until then we will remain in somewhat of a survival mode.
2. Dilution is a consequence of the toxic financing. In the absence of other funding, selling shares of the company to the toxic financiers is how we get money from them. We are using this money to create more wealth in the future by buying new products and funding continuing research on our own products. Short term pain for long term gain. I think that theoretically splits are mostly psychological. There are some tangible effects like certain funds being able to buy once we reach certain share prices. But in general I think reverse splits “look bad” because it is an inorganic measure used to raise the share price, and it results in share holders’ share count being reduced. While the value of their investment should stay the same, it’s still a psychological “bummer”. It will probably attract a more diverse group of investors who wouldn’t otherwise take one look at a penny stock, so that’s good. A forward split, in contrast looks good because of all the opposite reasons. Your share count increases, and you are lowering the share price because it’s getting too high to attract some investors. What a nice problem to have when your share price is getting too high .
3. My personal investment horizon is long term. I have about half of my shares in Roth account, and I really don’t plan on touching those shares for the foreseeable future, 10+ years. The other half of my investment I will probably reevaluate in around 5 years.
4. I like the additions we’ve made to the pipeline with ESS, MS Precise, and the pending Georgetown option. I think they each have significant potential. I have been pretty underwhelmed by lympro, but hopefully that turns around with time, although the latest numbers do not seem promising. Funding for the additions is still a concern of mine but in the event that any one of them successfully makes it to market it should more than make up for the initial investment for all of them combined.
5. This doesn’t make a difference to me, personally. I think he’s doing what he has to do to keep the company afloat. I have felt misled by him at times but I don’t know what the alternative would be. More honesty and openness would be appreciated at a personal level, but I don’t think our current financiers would care for anything but public optimism from the face of the company, and right now we are dependent on them.
6. I think any money coming in decreases our dependence on toxic financing, which is a good thing. I would rather sell that diagnostic division with royalties than spin it off but I am pretty ignorant in this area and sale just seems cleaner and simpler than a spin off.
8. I think if we can get to a point where a 10:1 or smaller split I would be happy. I really can’t tell how high a priority uplisting is since they’ve been saying they’ve been saying they are going to do it for the last two years. I’m hopeful they will continue to be patient with it until there will be no more than a 25:1 split. If we were to somehow, miraculously uplist without a reverse split I would think it would take at least another two to three years with MANF showing very positive clinical results and being fast tracked by the FDA, combined with our other products bringing in enough revenue to not only finance all the trials, but to be profitable as a company. It could happen, but I’m not counting on it. I see this happening in more of a 5 to 7 year time frame.
I think the company is really focused on trying to find non-dilutive ways to fund MANF trials. I think Lympro was plan A, and while it may still work out, we are in the process of starting plan B with the new acquisitions, just in case plan A doesn’t work out as well as originally thought. Until we get something to work, we have no choice but to continue to use less than desirable methods of financing the company. The issues of dilution and using a reverse split to uplist are, to me, things short term holders should be concerned about, but will iron themselves out over the long term. I think our pipeline is very impressive, and has more potential than any other I am aware of. I think 5 years is a minimum to see any MANF products make it to market. But I think between Lympro and the Georgetown test, ESS, and MS Precise, we will be sitting pretty within 5 years. Then there is always Phenoguard. And that is just the stuff we know about. I’m sure future will hold many surprises both good and bad. At the end of the day it’s a pretty big risk with the potential to change the lives of patients and investors alike. If you’re in this stock at least your willing to take a chance to change your life, rather than just settling for the status quo. I’ll leave you with a quote of Theodore Roosevelt, that I think applies quite nicely.
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
2. Dilution is a consequence of the toxic financing. In the absence of other funding, selling shares of the company to the toxic financiers is how we get money from them. We are using this money to create more wealth in the future by buying new products and funding continuing research on our own products. Short term pain for long term gain. I think that theoretically splits are mostly psychological. There are some tangible effects like certain funds being able to buy once we reach certain share prices. But in general I think reverse splits “look bad” because it is an inorganic measure used to raise the share price, and it results in share holders’ share count being reduced. While the value of their investment should stay the same, it’s still a psychological “bummer”. It will probably attract a more diverse group of investors who wouldn’t otherwise take one look at a penny stock, so that’s good. A forward split, in contrast looks good because of all the opposite reasons. Your share count increases, and you are lowering the share price because it’s getting too high to attract some investors. What a nice problem to have when your share price is getting too high .
3. My personal investment horizon is long term. I have about half of my shares in Roth account, and I really don’t plan on touching those shares for the foreseeable future, 10+ years. The other half of my investment I will probably reevaluate in around 5 years.
4. I like the additions we’ve made to the pipeline with ESS, MS Precise, and the pending Georgetown option. I think they each have significant potential. I have been pretty underwhelmed by lympro, but hopefully that turns around with time, although the latest numbers do not seem promising. Funding for the additions is still a concern of mine but in the event that any one of them successfully makes it to market it should more than make up for the initial investment for all of them combined.
5. This doesn’t make a difference to me, personally. I think he’s doing what he has to do to keep the company afloat. I have felt misled by him at times but I don’t know what the alternative would be. More honesty and openness would be appreciated at a personal level, but I don’t think our current financiers would care for anything but public optimism from the face of the company, and right now we are dependent on them.
6. I think any money coming in decreases our dependence on toxic financing, which is a good thing. I would rather sell that diagnostic division with royalties than spin it off but I am pretty ignorant in this area and sale just seems cleaner and simpler than a spin off.
8. I think if we can get to a point where a 10:1 or smaller split I would be happy. I really can’t tell how high a priority uplisting is since they’ve been saying they’ve been saying they are going to do it for the last two years. I’m hopeful they will continue to be patient with it until there will be no more than a 25:1 split. If we were to somehow, miraculously uplist without a reverse split I would think it would take at least another two to three years with MANF showing very positive clinical results and being fast tracked by the FDA, combined with our other products bringing in enough revenue to not only finance all the trials, but to be profitable as a company. It could happen, but I’m not counting on it. I see this happening in more of a 5 to 7 year time frame.
I think the company is really focused on trying to find non-dilutive ways to fund MANF trials. I think Lympro was plan A, and while it may still work out, we are in the process of starting plan B with the new acquisitions, just in case plan A doesn’t work out as well as originally thought. Until we get something to work, we have no choice but to continue to use less than desirable methods of financing the company. The issues of dilution and using a reverse split to uplist are, to me, things short term holders should be concerned about, but will iron themselves out over the long term. I think our pipeline is very impressive, and has more potential than any other I am aware of. I think 5 years is a minimum to see any MANF products make it to market. But I think between Lympro and the Georgetown test, ESS, and MS Precise, we will be sitting pretty within 5 years. Then there is always Phenoguard. And that is just the stuff we know about. I’m sure future will hold many surprises both good and bad. At the end of the day it’s a pretty big risk with the potential to change the lives of patients and investors alike. If you’re in this stock at least your willing to take a chance to change your life, rather than just settling for the status quo. I’ll leave you with a quote of Theodore Roosevelt, that I think applies quite nicely.
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
