Conference Call Summary and Conclusions

[sheltiesage]

I was also wondering about the shareholder meeting move up. Everything seems to be rushed all of a sudden, 10k reported earlier than necessary, shareholder meeting, r/s near term possibilities. It's unsettling, at least to me. Whenever I have rushed into a decision, bad results have transpired. Just saying. SS

First of all, I definitely disagree she was a plant. She wins an Acedemy award if she was. Secondly, think about what is transpiring. We have more irons in the fire than ever by adding retinal neural progenitor cells, mesenchymal cells, and Ipsc's. We have big pharma "all over us". We will be on the Nasdaq. Our current cash/burn is well under 20 million A YEAR! In one year we will be beyond the 150k dose and we have already hit a grandslam with ALL THE PATIENTS at the LOWEST DOSE. What Gary said and is very easy to compute, is that if we partner now to save a few million in expenses, we are giving up billions. He is absolutely correct to go about it in this manner. I am of the opinion when we inject 100k cells in the coming weeks and the results are even better, there is absolutely no way big pharma will let this go to one of their competitors. We will get our billion dollar deal or at worst be bought out in the billions. The bottom line is the science. No one can argue we don't have the goods to entice such a deal in the near future.
The 10K is another example of why we need a CFO. Would there have been such an error in the details describing the R/S? Not if they were worth a grain of salt. I wished someone asked why they moved up the shareholder meeting from June to April.

[iamaverb]

"I would be hard pressed to argue with anything in your post. I am fully aware and realize the world
isn't perfect and mistakes are made and always understand that. In this case I still have one eyebrow
raised."

With as much as I have invested in ACT, I too have one eyebrow raised. Did they try to throw a fastball past us and got caught. Since the commission recognizes the 14a until it is amended, I for one won't rest until it is filed. Trust but verify.

On a side note, I believe that under the circumstances Gary outlined, the RS will be a benefit to the share price.

[rocky301]

I was also wondering about the shareholder meeting move up. Everything seems to be rushed all of a sudden, 10k reported earlier than necessary, shareholder meeting, r/s near term possibilities. It's unsettling, at least to me. Whenever I have rushed into a decision, bad results have transpired. Just saying. SS

sheltiesage ,

The 10K was done early for one reason only. So they could file Proxy with updated financials.
There should be no doubt about that part. In order for the auditors to have completed this task
I also have no doubt the RS Proxy was in the works the end of December and well ahead of
Proxy to increase AS#...thanks

[Wallace907]

sheltiesage ,

The 10K was done early for one reason only. So they could file Proxy with updated financials.
There should be no doubt about that part. In order for the auditors to have completed this task
I also have no doubt the RS Proxy was in the works the end of December and well ahead of
Proxy to increase AS#...thanks

Any insight to how rebalancing the russell index will affect us? Seems like this was big motivation to get moving before June.

[sheltiesage]

Rocky, I obviously was not aware of that. Thank you. SS

sheltiesage ,

The 10K was done early for one reason only. So they could file Proxy with updated financials.
There should be no doubt about that part. In order for the auditors to have completed this task
I also have no doubt the RS Proxy was in the works the end of December and well ahead of
Proxy to increase AS#...thanks

[HiddenIdentity]

Any insight to how rebalancing the russell index will affect us? Seems like this was big motivation to get moving before June.

Stock included in Russel 2000 or 3000 is bought by funds related to Russel index. It basicaly mean that these fund are obliged to buy stocks in Russels index..So if no one these funds would need to buy :-)

[minnesotafarmcountry]

Question...I am slightly overwhelmed and confused trying to catch up with all info. Does the R/S have to be voted on by shareholders if they do an across the board adjustment, O/S and A/S? There was some question in this regard...somewhere, and I don't know if I missed the answer. Thanks!!

[rocky301]

Question...I am slightly overwhelmed and confused trying to catch up with all info. Does the R/S have to be voted on by shareholders if they do an across the board adjustment, O/S and A/S? There was some question in this regard...somewhere, and I don't know if I missed the answer. Thanks!!

minnesota,

Any reverse split needs shareholder approval no matter what the terms...thanks

[All in J]

That little mistake could turn into quite a big mistake. Espesially for those that changed thier PPS position.

[soonerchamp]

Is it just possible that the 75 year old lady that has one of these many eye diseases (just like millions) has been keeping up with this science? Certainly. Which is a good reason to understand its not all about investors. Its sweet to think about all the people that are out there that are watching this. M2Cents ;-)

[stemedga]

That little mistake could turn into quite a big mistake. Espesially for those that changed thier PPS position.

All in J,
Actually I thought the same at first but if you think about it, it was everyone's respondsibility to listen to the PR announced cc before they sold.
Very sorry they did sell but I don't think they have any recourse. Time will tell.
Eddie

[ablidy]

That little mistake could turn into quite a big mistake. Espesially for those that changed thier PPS position.

That's my read . I want the FEC document filed ASAP since the less time to make this unsettled situation the worst for all. If you sold on a mistaken filing or if the stated document does not change.

[keybridge]

Make no mistake, as low key and informal as it appeared, yesterday's conference call was pivotal. Put aside the statements that the science continues to work with patients, which in itself is enough to throw a party, from a pure business perspective, the company is making great strides. Management has established relationships with Big Pharm and is gaining interest and being offered guidance from large institutional funds...if they tell you what to do, you do it. Gary appears to be following the recipe he was given to position ACT to become listed on Nasdaq Capital Markets.

And (this is big) the timing of events on both the science and business front appear to be accelerating from the glacial pace we have become accustomed to a more rapid series of material events. The first half of 2012 may be a little ho-hum, but the second half of the year is where we see the batter turn into cake.

It's time to buy, folks.

[tradeup]

Some of my thoughts leading up to and after the CC...

Our science is working, and it's very early in the game. As we progress through additional patients and move through these first 2-3 cohorts (not 2-3 patients), it will become increasingly clear to a much broader audience that we have a real therapy within reach, and to Pharma, a very marketable product -- one that could replenish massive revenue losses stemming from expiring patents and the gradual shift to regenerative therapeutics.

Trying to broadcast our message from the position of a penny stock on the OTCBB with over 2 Billion shares hanging over our heads was just never going to cut it. The reverse split is a necessity and it had to happen this year. Many of us, myself included, were hoping to see a reverse from at least $0.20 or above, but that may not be the case.

Securing funding that will allow us to continue our trials and expand our R&D and IP is the primary focus right now. With additional pending settlements ahead of us, and an already battered down share price, our ability to raise substantial funds without wreaking havoc to shareholder value has been largely compromised. An uplisting along with institutional participation will help.

My position in the past has been that the "roadmap" we're expecting is more of a precedent to additional dilution as a means of funding.

I perceived the naked short selling argument as deflection away from more serious concerns and reality.

While I'm hopeful to see an amendment to the Proxy that treats the O/S and A/S equally post-split, or within a more proportional ratio, I have no doubt this was an error in judgement rather than an error in grammar. This was either a measure put in place to prevent takeover, despite language in the 14a saying otherwise, or perhaps an indicator of future funding requirements. I personally think it pertained more to the latter. In negotiating a JV, it's both our clinical achievements and our ability to go it alone that puts us in a position of strength as we approach each new milestone.

This company has cheated death at least a few times and it's actually remarkable we're still alive. We're not out of the woods yet, but we're getting there, hopefully. Many of the things that plague our capital structure could have been prevented, but things could also be much worse. As long as we "get it right the first time" in the clinic, there should be tremendous upside going forward. It's shaping up that 2012-2013 will be the rebirth of this company as our scientific platform is broadening at the same pace as it's strengthening.

We're targeting very real and very large untapped markets. I hope everyone understands the healing power of massive capital infusion. Striking a deal or deals worth Billions of dollars can rectify years worth of past mistakes and financial troubles, overnight.

The bottom line is: everything points to big things in the works, but these things take time and that path is likely going to be a volatile one. We're not creating an end product to sell, we're building a platform to partner.

Whether on the OTCBB or Nasdaq, we have plenty to be excited about, but there is more dilution ahead and everyone should be prepared for it as we bridge the gap towards validation and partnering.

[keybridge]

'While I'm hopeful to see an amendment to the Proxy that treats the O/S and A/S equally post-split, or within a more proportional ratio, I have no doubt this was an error in judgement rather than an error in grammar. This was either a measure put in place to prevent takeover, despite language in the 14a saying otherwise, or perhaps an indicator of future funding requirements. I personally think it pertained more to the latter. In negotiating a JV, it's both our clinical achievements and our ability to go it alone that puts us in a position of strength as we approach each new milestone."

Nice remarks. But I thought your comments on the A/S were very provoctive, since the "error in judgement" suggested that management was acting in bad faith to further (potentially) dilute shareholders in the hopes that nobody would in effect notice or care. Not to mention that this would have increase the percentage of A/S to O/S by a factor by some huge multiple (over 10 times). That seems a bit far-fetched, especially given that the management has been fairly transparent in its communication to investors, and it took Gary no time with ease to provide clarification.

If management is concerned with a hostile takeover and wants to establish anti-taking measures, they could direclty ask for shareholder approval to put in place all the standard poison pill type of provisions -- it's not rocket science. As it stands, there are enough A/S as a percentage of the oustanding shares to make a hostile takeover attempt very expensive and fraught with uncertainty for the bidder making the attempt. If someone on this board is a corporate attorney that has experience with securities law and corporate governance, it would be interesting to hear their take on what's needed to execute a hostile takeover, and how ACT under its current structure could offer a defense?

[Rikker]

Hi Folks.

According to Mr. Rabin's email response. They will amend the 14a filing on Monday. That filing will also include the OS and AS ratio.

[Wallace907]

Make no mistake, as low key and informal as it appeared, yesterday's conference call was pivotal. Put aside the statements that the science continues to work with patients, which in itself is enough to throw a party, from a pure business perspective, the company is making great strides. Management has established relationships with Big Pharm and is gaining interest and being offered guidance from large institutional funds...if they tell you what to do, you do it. Gary appears to be following the recipe he was given to position ACT to become listed on Nasdaq Capital Markets.

And (this is big) the timing of events on both the science and business front appear to be accelerating from the glacial pace we have become accustomed to a more rapid series of material events. The first half of 2012 may be a little ho-hum, but the second half of the year is where we see the batter turn into cake.

It's time to buy, folks.

"if they tell you what to do, you do it."

exactly. they are rolling out the red carpet.

[rocky301]

'While I'm hopeful to see an amendment to the Proxy that treats the O/S and A/S equally post-split, or within a more proportional ratio, I have no doubt this was an error in judgement rather than an error in grammar. This was either a measure put in place to prevent takeover, despite language in the 14a saying otherwise, or perhaps an indicator of future funding requirements. I personally think it pertained more to the latter. In negotiating a JV, it's both our clinical achievements and our ability to go it alone that puts us in a position of strength as we approach each new milestone."

Nice remarks. But I thought your comments on the A/S were very provoctive, since the "error in judgement" suggested that management was acting in bad faith to further (potentially) dilute shareholders in the hopes that nobody would in effect notice or care. Not to mention that this would have increase the percentage of A/S to O/S by a factor by some huge multiple (over 10 times). That seems a bit far-fetched, especially given that the management has been fairly transparent in its communication to investors, and it took Gary no time with ease to provide clarification.

If management is concerned with a hostile takeover and wants to establish anti-taking measures, they could direclty ask for shareholder approval to put in place all the standard poison pill type of provisions -- it's not rocket science. As it stands, there are enough A/S as a percentage of the oustanding shares to make a hostile takeover attempt very expensive and fraught with uncertainty for the bidder making the attempt. If someone on this board is a corporate attorney that has experience with securities law and corporate governance, it would be interesting to hear their take on what's needed to execute a hostile takeover, and how ACT under its current structure could offer a defense?

keybridge,

The only defense would be the "unsophisticated shareholders" not selling out per a tender offer and saying
no to a Proxy fight..

However, the Board of Directors is not aware of any attempt to take control of the Company and the Board of Directors has not approved the reverse split with the intent that it be utilized as a type of anti-takeover device. The Company’s certificate of incorporation and by-laws do not have any anti-takeover provisions.

[keybridge]

keybridge,

The only defense would be the "unsophisticated shareholders" not selling out per a tender offer and saying
no to a Proxy fight..

However, the Board of Directors is not aware of any attempt to take control of the Company and the Board of Directors has not approved the reverse split with the intent that it be utilized as a type of anti-takeover device. The Company’s certificate of incorporation and by-laws do not have any anti-takeover provisions.

Thanks Rocky...perhaps another tactic is the threat of the A/S being issued to insiders, which would then make the success of a proxy fight very low since approximately 40% of the outstanding shares would then be held by management and directors. Maybe that's far fetch, too. One proxy fight could also attract other bidders as well, resulting in a bidding war. Hostile takeovers are just not as easy as some would make it appear.

[rocky301]

Thanks Rocky...perhaps another tactic is the threat of the A/S being issued to insiders, which would then make the success of a proxy fight very low since approximately 40% of the outstanding shares would then be held by management and directors. Maybe that's far fetch, too. One proxy fight could also attract other bidders as well, resulting in a bidding war. Hostile takeovers are just not as easy as some would make it appear.

keybridge,

as you stated, it is not rocket science to implement ant-takeover provisions. ACT has done
nothing in this area and Rabin has stated on several occasions he had faith in the shareholder
base not to approve or go along with. This also implied to me they most likely haven't been swamped
by offers or anything even close to what has been mentioned on message boards. ACT isn't the least
bit worried about it so that tells the story for me...thanks