UK Markets closed

Applied DNA Sciences, Inc. (APDN)

NasdaqCM - NasdaqCM Real-time price. Currency in USD
Add to watchlist
1.2700-0.1200 (-8.63%)
At close: 04:00PM EDT
1.3300 +0.06 (+4.72%)
After hours: 06:50PM EDT
Sign in to post a message.
  • B
    THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS APPARENTLY FAILED TO VET HAYWARD. Executives Warrant More Thorough Background Screens (by Roy Maurer March 9, 2020). Research finds that CEOs and other C-suite executives often slip around companies' background screening policies when they are the very people most in need of comprehensive vetting.
    That's because the stakes tend to be far higher than for the typical frontline employee. The company makes a significant financial investment that a company when it hires a new executive. The person holds an enormous amount of responsibility and influence, not to mention the liability he or she carries in the forms of potential conflicts of interest, negative media coverage, and past or current litigation.
    "Companies expect to trust executives with protecting assets and financials, and a wrong decision in hiring an executive can have an immensely harmful impact on the company brand," said Marco Piovesan, the CEO of InfoMart, an Atlanta-based background screening firm.
    Executives are the face of the company, Cunneen said. "If an executive exaggerates or fakes his or her background, these are the people who become the news headlines which bring negative publicity to the company and devalues the company stock."
    Damage to brand reputation is one of the top business risks, said Chris LeClair, senior vice president and general manager at First Advantage, a global background screening provider headquartered in Atlanta. The bad behavior most harmful to a company's reputation is public exposure to criminal or scandalous acts, he added. "An executive indiscretion disclosed publicly can have a large negative influence on the bottom line and on attracting and retaining talent. In the last two years, 81 percent of the Fortune 100 had adverse media exposure related to extortion, embezzlement, harassment or scandal."
    A couple of recent examples from executive screens conducted by First Advantage found that:
    A company's new chief financial officer had previously been arrested in a check fraud scheme.
    A candidate for company president claimed a false college degree, had filed for personal bankruptcy and had two lawsuits pending against her and her former employer.
    Executives tend to have unique professional histories deserving of a more thorough background check than the typical worker.
    "An executive's background vetting is more comprehensive, covering a wider range of services with a global reach that may not be conducted for other employees," Piovesan said. "Alongside the usual basic screening due diligence—such as criminal record checks, motor vehicle records, sexual offender databases, sanctions searches, education verification, previous employment verification and drug screening—executive screening should include additional vetting of professional licenses, social media searches, credit reports, extensive reputational searches, and company ownership and directorships positions globally."
    Cunneen said that education verifications and criminal records checks "are obvious, given recent headlines," and recommends adding civil searches to check any history of lawsuits, credit reports for those with fiduciary responsibility, and social media, news and publication searches to gauge public image.
    Experts also recommend searches for:
    Any litigation involving the candidate at the state and federal level.
    Affiliations, board memberships or corporate ties that may pose conflicts of interest.
    Corporate financial records on past businesses the candidate owned or managed.
    A global address history because executives often have work experience that has taken them around the world.
    Piovesan noted that it's not just the level of screening that must be enhanced for executives but also the concierge-type level of candidate support. "Executives are often personally walked through the process of scheduling a drug test or providing required information," he said.
    "The same Fair Credit Reporting Act [FCRA] and state laws apply, however, the seven-year limit on negative or adverse information no longer applies for those making $75,000 or more per year, under the federal FCRA," Cunneen said. "Therefore, arrest records, dismissed criminal cases, civil records, and other adverse information may be reported further back than seven years for those executives."
    Piovesan said that all the standard consent rules apply when screening executives, but it needs to be made clear to those executives that the screening may be "very comprehensive" in terms of extensive due diligence.
    Experts also agreed that periodic rescreening is a best practice for all employee levels.
    "Headlines and negative publicity have proven time and time again that executives can and do make poor decisions," Cunneen said. "It would be better for the company to discover these issues themselves, and either head them off or remediate the issues before they become even more serious and costly."
  • B
    MAKING A CASE THAT CEO HAYWARD BROKE THE LAW. We have a conference call record where CEO Hayward stated that his company's DNA product was comparable to the Thomas Edison invention of the incandescent light bulb. Let's first examine the facts surrounding Edison's invention. Edison's invention in 1878 marked the beginning of commercially manufactured light bulbs and in 1880, Thomas Edison’s company, Edison Electric Light Company began marketing its new product. Shortly thereafter, the incandescent light bulb spread rapidly across America and then spread around the world. Just 20 years later, Edison's incandescent light bulb had spread across the globe and millions of American homes had electric lighting. Now let's examine Hayward's statement that he made in early 2015 - about 20 years after his company's DNA product was invented. We know that in 2015, Hayward's DNA product had not been successfully commercialized. It had not spread around the world. And it was not adopted in America to thwart counterfeiting. Moreover, it seems Hayward misled many APDN shareholders and institutional investors to believe APDN had something unique as well as the best DNA authentication offering available. Research shows that nothing could be further from the truth. We know Hayward compares his obsolete technology to penicillin and Thomas Edison's light bulb (1st quarter 2015 call). However, investors who have spoken to APDN's competitors in the industry know APDN's technology is obsolete and outdated and essentially worthless. When CEO Hayward makes a public statement that his technology compares to the Edison light bulb, he better have supportive facts to back up that incredible statement. But Hayward does not have any facts to back up that preposterous statement. The conclusion here is crystal clear - Hayward is guilty of misrepresentation/fraud - A CRIME!
  • S
    What one apdn director asked another director - who is smarter, the directors of apdn or Dr Hayward? The other director answered, I don't know I'm not smart enough to answer that question.
  • m
    I no longer fear any downturn in apdn thanks to dr Hayward great leadership!
    Once you lose 98% of your investment you are fear free
    Thank you again dr Hayward
  • B
    CEO HAYWARD - STOP BEING SUCH A CRYBABY. I'm convinced Hayward is a Sociopath and here's why. We now know about the scathing and blistering 2015 APDN report. Let's examine what he did about it and the results.
    James Hayward, CEO, Applied DNA Sciences, stated, “The report is a blatant and transparent attempt by parties to profit from an immediate and precipitous decline in the company’s share price through the use of an opinion piece published anonymously and laden with innuendo and the use of selective historical information. It is also important for investors in Applied DNA Sciences and other stakeholders to carefully consider the statement the author made on the first page of his/her editorial attacking the company: ‘I am/we are short APDN. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions.’” Hayward also contacted the feds to further investigate.
    The authors of this report certainly had a First Amendment right to publish their report. Nothing wrong here. The authors also had a right to publish anonymously. Nothing wrong here. And the authors certainly had a right to short the stock based on their research findings. Nothing wrong here. Hayward could have sued for libel, but I have found no evidence that he ever did. HAYWARD STOP YOUR WHINING!
    Applied DNA Sciences, Inc. Loses Appeals on Former Employees’ Unemployment Insurance Claims.
    The California Unemployment Appeals Board has ruled against Applied DNA Sciences, Inc. (OTCBB:APDN) in its effort to disqualify three former employees from receiving unemployment insurance benefits under section 256 of the California Unemployment Insurance Code. APDN, presently based in Stony Brook, New York, claims to offer botanical DNA-based protection against counterfeiting, fraud, identity theft and similar illegal acts.

    “Two of the three former executives worked for several months without pay, out of loyalty to the company and promises based on supposedly groundbreaking technology provided by Biowell Technologies Inc. of Taiwan, and the third remained in employment limbo. After terminating the employees without explanation, APDN claimed that the employees were separated from their jobs because of fraudulent activity,” says Peter M. Kunstler, attorney for the claimants. “The Appeals Board agreed that fraud and collusion are false charges. We believe the terminations actually resulted from an array of breaches by both old and new management.”

    Kunstler, of the law firm Makarem & Associates APLC, is preparing for the May, 2007 trial of a civil suit against APDN on behalf of four former employees, based on breach of contract and violations of California Labor Law.

    APDN hired the claimants in 2003 and 2004. Concerns over their employment status and changes in the direction of the company led the claimants to request written severance agreements. The COO/Acting CFO/Contracts Manager of the company, Karin Klemm, executed Addenda to the claimants’ employment contracts, which new management contended were fraudulently procured. This was the basis for APDN’s challenge which the ALJ overruled in the decision confirmed by the Appeals Board.
  • m
    Institutional buyers are getting to know what dr. Hayward sold them
  • B
    DUE DILIGENCE 101. Folks, please read this and understand this. In the 1990s, a Taiwanese scientist with a Ph.D. developed a DNA tag from a potato. He believed this DNA tag could be used in textiles to thwart counterfeiting. He tried very hard to commercialize this DNA-tag product but he failed. Wisely, he sold his patented DNA tag to some not-so-smart Americans in a start-up company from a shell corporation and they named their company, Applied DNA Sciences, Inc. It is a proven fact that never in this company's history has this DNA tag been successfully commercialized! When I say successfully commercialized, I mean achieving profitability - the Gold Standard for successful commercialization. This comes from APDN's prospectus and I urge all of you to heed its importance:
    Our business is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, discussed in more detail in the following section. These risks include, among others, the following key risks:
    · The COVID-19 global pandemic may materially and adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.
    · There is substantial doubt relating to our ability to continue as a going concern.
    · We have a history of net losses.
    · We have not produced significant revenues. This makes it difficult to evaluate our future prospects and increases the risk that we will not be successful.
    · Our opportunities in pharmaceuticals and biologics will require substantial additional funding. We may not be successful in our efforts to create a pipeline of
    product candidates or to develop commercially successful products. If we fail to successfully identify, finance and develop product candidates, our commercial
    opportunities in pharmaceuticals and biologics may be limited.
    · Our EUA-authorized LineaTM 1.0 COVID-19 Assay Kit is not currently being utilized or offered for sale as a primary diagnostic due to the risk of false negative
    results caused by the BA.1 Omicron Variant. Due to this fact, the future utility of the Linea 1.0 COVID-19 Assay Kit is unknown. The EUA for the Linea 1.0 COVID-
    19 Assay Kit could be revoked or terminated by the FDA at any time and will cease to be effective once the public health emergency justifying its use ends. In
    addition, should the Company determine there is no future utility for the Linea 1.0 COVID-19 Assay Kit, the Company may voluntarily withdraw the assay’s EUA.
    · Our LineaTM 2.0 COVID-19 Assay may never receive an EUA from FDA If not authorized by FDA, use of the LineaTM 2.0 Assay under the NYSDOH conditional
    approval will be limited to samples from New York State. Should the LineaTM 2.0 COVID-19 Assay fail to gain full approval from the NYSDOH, our ability to provide
    COVID-19 testing with the LineaTM 2.0 COVID-19 Assay could be negatively impacted.
    · Our COVID-19 Testing may become obsolete for a variety of reasons, including COVID-19 reaching an endemic phase, future SARS-CoV-2 genetic mutations, or an
    end to the current pandemic. The utility will also be diminished if positivity rates reach levels high enough to render pooled COVID-19 testing ineffective or
    inefficient. Pharmaceutical and biologic products are highly complex, and if we or our collaborators and customers are unable to provide quality and timely offerings
    to our respective customers, our business could suffer.
    · Our COVID-19 Diagnostic Tests could become obsolete or their utility could be significantly diminished by additional mutations to the SARS-CoV-2 genome.
    · Pharmaceutical and biologic-related revenue will be dependent on our collaborators’ and customers’ demand for our manufacturing services.
    · The results from preclinical studies may not be predictive of the results of later preclinical studies and/or clinical trials.
    · The markets for our drug and biologic candidates and linear DNA are very competitive, and we may be unable to continue to compete effectively in these industries
    in the future.
    · The markets for our supply chain security and product authentication solutions are very competitive, and we may be unable to continue to compete effectively in
    these industries in the future.
    · Intellectual property litigation could harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.
    · Our joint pursuit of a potential vaccine for COVID-19 is at an early stage and may be unable to produce a vaccine that successfully treats the virus in a timely
    manner, if at all, and compete successfully with vaccines developed by larger companies.
    · Pharmaceutical and biologic-related revenue is generally dependent on regulatory approval, oversight and compliance.
    · The regulatory approval processes of the FDA, USDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities are lengthy, time consuming, and inherently unpredictable. If
    we are ultimately unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, we will be unable to generate product revenue and our business will be
    substantially harmed.
    · Our product candidates may cause undesirable side
  • S
    APDN’s 1990s era Chinese technology hopelessly obsolete as superior Synthetic DNA and competitors dominate pharma, cotton and banking. APDN endless dilution is egregious, with shares down over 99%.
  • S
    EPS ABOUT 10% WORSE THAN LAST YEAR. -23 CENTS V -21. Isn't doctor Hayward a nice guy he took only half of his salary. Now if he took his full salary their earnings would have been even worse. This company has never been profitable since its Inception. And every quarter he Rants and Raves about future prospects how they look so great and he's been saying that for the past 20 years. I believe this is the first time CEO Hayward has waived 50% of his salary and I think they're a couple reasons for this. First of all maybe he's reading The Message Board here. Secondly he is so desperate and the company is on such shaky grounds, that by taking half of his salary he can make a difference in the earnings per share. Since its Inception, this stock has lost about 99.99% of its value. Hayward has a long ways to go to make up for those losses and I personally think that's insurmountable at this point in time.
  • S
    DUE DILIGENCE 102 folks, I'm going to be real with you, I hate projections. I'll tell you why. So often projections do not come to fruition. Let's look at science specifically biology we do so many experiments on mice but often they don't work on humans. I see people get so excited when some Test shows marvelous results in mice and people say we now have a cure for cancer and then when they try the procedure on humans it's a failure. If you look at Hayward's conference call it's all projections in the future it's called pro forma and so often it just doesn't work. Hayward gets People Pumped up when he says all the things we're doing all these great things with our company we got all these new products and blah blah blah and we're going to have a lot of money rolling in. History shows that most these projections do not turn out the way they were originally forecast. This company is a failure and its failure rate is virtually unprecedented. Whatever Hayward says please take it with a grain of salt and believe that the chances are it's not going to work. That's the history of this company and I don't think anything's going to change. Nanotechnology is going to replace DNA technology it's just a matter of time look at electric vehicles they are going to replace gasoline vehicles again it's just a matter of time the handwriting is on the wall this company is going to go out of business.
  • B
  • r
    All you need to see is the first part: "APDN reports quarterly loss" AGAIN, and unlikely that'll change anytime soon. Maybe they should stop marking textiles and start marking bitcoins, probably make more money.
  • S
    HAYWARD = MINATURE BERNIE MADOFF. Now admittedly Hayward didn't destroy billions of dollars of investors money like Bernie Madoff. But I think the evidence is compelling that this man destroyed probably around a third of a billion dollars of investors money. Now that's a lot of money that's an awful lot of money and he's really hurt a lot of people out there as well as institutional investors. And if you read the previous posts I think there is very strong evidence for me to name Dr. Hayward a miniature Bernie Madoff. That's my firm opinion and I think the evidence supports that opinion. My hope now is that the feds intervene and arrest this man and convict him and lock him up in a federal penitentiary where he belongs. I certainly hope that will eventually happen.
  • S
    REALITY CHECK. Zacks reports a $0.28 loss for the quarter. And if Hayward did not take a 50% pay reduction, we're looking at about a 30 cent for the quarter. And shockingly since the beginning of this year the stock has decreased by about 70%. That means all stockholders who have held the stock since January one 2022 have lost 70% of their investment. Folks as I've said repeatedly doctor Hayward is a master con man he sounds so good and his conference calls sound so convincing that doctor Hayward should win an Oscar award for his grand performance. I need to remind everyone reading this do not be fooled by Dr Hayward. He has not been able to deliver over the past 20 years and he's had 20 years and 80 quarters to deliver and he's failed each and every time. This track record is so outrageous if he was probably one of your employees he would have been fired a long time ago because this guy is just full of BS this guy is the biggest BS con man in the world he's a con and I don't believe this company will ever get off the ground. Now don't forget Hayward got a 4.2 million infusion of cash this quarter so the six million you're looking at well subtract 4.2 million and you'll really see what their financial situation is like it's not good folks it's not good.
  • B
    Applied DNA Sciences Q2 2022 Earnings Preview Predicts an EPS 50% WORSE than a year ago. The consensus EPS Estimate is -$0.33 vs. -$0.21 last year.
  • S
    APPLIED DNA SCIENCES IS A CORRUPT PUBLIC COMPANY AND HERE'S PROOF. A California appellate court of competent jurisdiction made a legal ruling which held that Dr. Hayward made false claims and false accusations against his former executives when he filed legal papers alleging that they had engaged in collusion and fraudulent activities. Following that ruling, the board of directors should have forced Dr Hayward to resign or they should have terminated his services. But they did neither. We also have irrefutable evidence that Dr. Hayward's former business partners were sent to prison because they were felons, Mobsters, and con men. When the board of directors learned of this, they should have forced Dr. Hayward's resignation or terminated his services. Once again, the board of directors did neither. If there's any collusion going on I think the evidence clearly points to the board of directors. Now when you have the board of directors and you have a CEO doing what this company is doing then we have established overwhelming evidence which indicates serious corruption going on at this company. The Stockholders of this company should go on the record insisting that Dr. Hayward immediately resign and the board of directors should be quickly replaced with a board consisting of competent, law-abiding and responsible citizens. Folks, get on the telephone and call this company and tell them to immediately terminate Dr. Hayward and replace the board of directors because of the serious corruption going on.
  • S
    EVER WONDER HOW THIS COMPANY HAS SURVIVED FOR SO LONG? The answer is simple. If everyone complied with the law and played by the rules, this company would have been out of business a long time ago. There's only one way this company has survived for such a long time. Now you know the answer!
  • S
    Something is fishy here. Zacks reports a $0.28 loss and the company reports a $0.23 loss. If HAYWARD did not take a 50% salary cut the EPS would probably be about two cents lower. The company says it has a little over six million dollars in its bank account. But 4.2 million dollars of that money came from the outside Institutional Investor. So all of it is not sales-related. In fact two-thirds of it is not sales-related. Now if you look at other companies like Apple they have billions of dollars in their bank account and it all came from sales. So you see this company really doesn't have much in sales. A previous post shows new cutting-edge technology that is far superior to this company's DNA technology. It's only a matter of time before this company's technology goes the way of the dinosaur. Folks, don't listen to Hayward. He's a master con man who should win an Oscar award.
  • B
    APDN's stock price hit a new low today. Should the stock price fall below $1, CEO Dr. Hayward will probably do a third reverse stock split and raise more outside money further diluting shareholder equity in a non-stop repeating cycle we have witnessed over the past 20 years. Some would categorize this as corporate malfeasance. CEO Dr. Hayward has destroyed around $300 million in investors' money. And his recklessness has not abated. Like cigarettes, this company needs to have a Warning Label that reads: Investing money in this company's stock is Dangerous and there is a very high likelihood you will lose some or all of your money.
  • S
    ALL CEOs OF PUBLICLY TRADED COMPANIES MUST BE SQUEAKY CLEAN. Let's examine Hayward. For starters, this man once had business Partners who were felons, mobsters, and con men. Hayward's former partners did time in prison. Right here, Hayward is off to a bad start. Secondly, Hayward knows or should know that his DNA product failed in the marketplace. We also know, Hayward is disingenuous when he tells people that his DNA product works. Legally, this is called corporate malfeasance and fraud. Fraud is a crime of moral turpitude. Doctors and lawyers can easily lose their licenses when convicted of moral turpitude. The prior posts on this message board describe clear instances a fraud perpetrated by Dr Hayward. CEO HAYWARD has also made enormous exaggerations is how his purported product compares to the Edison Light bulb. This is actually a hoax. I am flabbergasted by the fact that this company has been around 20 years and institutional investors keep on pumping millions of dollars into this company and stockholders keep on purchasing the shares of the stock. At the end of the day, this company is going to go down in the history books as one of the longest stock frauds in recent US History. Mark my words.