67 replies to this topic

[MrSpud]

Chromadex to start marketing Nicotinamide riboside - Is this a good one?

From http://health-nutrit...-pterostilbene/

ChromaDex: We’ll do for nicotinamide riboside what we did for pterostilbene


ChromaDex chief executive Frank Jaksch was speaking to NutraIngredients-USA.com after securing exclusive worldwide rights to a novel manufacturing process for NR from Cornell University.

Production scale up, safety studies, then regulatory filings…

A vitamin found naturally in milk, NR is a more potent version of niacin (vitamin B3) and a precursor to nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD), increased cellular levels of which have multiple health benefits, said Jaksch.


“The process we’ve licensed is a synthetic process for manufacturing NR. There is not enough NR in milk to make extracting it from that economically viable. This makes it possible.

“The plan is to do for NR what we’ve done with pTeroPure. We’ll most likely start by targeting the dietary supplements sector and then eventually move towards food.”


He added: “We’re looking at around a 6-12 month timeline for scaling up production to a commercial level but in parallel we’ll run toxicology/safety studies and start putting together the regulatory package.”


…And human clinical studies to follow

As for the science behind NR, the data Chromadex had seen from Cornell was compelling, said Jaksch.

“We’re excited because we think this is really a next generation niacin story. It’s a better form of the compound. The exciting thing about NR is that it reacts on the NAD pathway, and based on data that we have, it could also be highly synergistic with pterostilbene.

“There are a lot of laboratory studies and some animal studies on NR, but we’ll probably need to do some animal studies and then a human clinical study.”

He added: “We’re just starting to look at the scope of this now. Potentially we could look at several areas, but we’ll probably choose a primary area of focus. It could be cardiovascular, or related to blood sugar control, or even related to neuroprotective effects.”


Consumer messaging would be developed accordingly, he said. “The NAD pathway is very important, but consumers are not going to understand what the hell that means – so we’ll have to talk about health benefits that people can understand.”

A largely unevaluated molecule?

NR was a “largely unevaluated molecule for the purpose of enhancing cellular NAD levels”, said Dr Anthony Sauve, Associate Professor of Pharmacology at Weill Cornell Medical College.

“Our published scientific work has verified that NR is perhaps the most potent NAD enhancing agent ever identified.”

Edited by MrSpud, 31 July 2011 - 01:20 AM.

[Anthony_Loera]

Glad they are doing studies on Nicotinimide rib.

However, does anyone have any compelling reason for pterostilbene? Last I heard it does not activate sirtuins like resveratrol does, so its still qualifies as mere fluff to me.

A

[nameless]

Have there been any studies with nicotinamide riboside and cholesterol? I'm curious if it acts in the same was as regular niacin does in regard to lipids, minus the flush. If so, I wouldn't be surprised to see a prescription version of it in the future.

As for pterostilbene, I suppose people taking it would be taking it for non-longevity benefits, maybe reducing heart disease risk, or whatever blueberry/pterostilbene studies are out there?

Same could be said for resveratrol though. No evidence it increases lifespan, unless you are an obese rodent with a poor diet. So even though one could look at pterostilbene as being pure fluff, the same could be said for resveratrol too, really (at least at this point, future studies could prove otherwise).

[MrSpud]

I don't really know about ptero, might be fluff, might turn out to be good. Here's what Chromadex's promo literature at http://www.pteropure...e _Brochure.pdf says
"Pterostilbene and resveratrol have very similar pharmacologic
properties, however Pterostilbene has several key advantages
over resveratrol. The main difference between Pterostilbene and
resveratrol is structural; Pterostilbene contains two methoxy groups
and one hydroxyl group while resveratrol has three hydroxyl groups.
The two methoxy groups cause Pterostilbene to be more lipophilic
(oil-soluble) than resveratrol, which increases oral absorption and
gives it a higher potential for cellular uptake.10 Pterostilbene also
has a much longer half life in the blood than resveratrol (105 minutes
vs. 14 minutes).2,18 A recent paper also demonstrated that when
administered orally, Pterostilbene showed 80% bioavailability vs
resveratrol’s 20%, and Pterostilbene’s lower total body clearance
rates and subsequent Vss value (measuring apparent volume of
distribution) suggested extensive tissue distribution.15
Several published studies refer to Pterostilbene as having better
activity than resveratrol.2,19 For example in vitro studies show that
unlike the related stilbenes resveratrol, piceatannol, or resveratrol
trimethylether, Pterostilbene is a potent peroxisome proliferator
activated receptor alpha (PPARа) agonist, lowering lipid levels in
the blood stream and may help maintain cholesterol levels already
within normal ranges.2 Both resveratrol and Pterostilbene have
been shown to exhibit beneficial effects and support a healthy
heart, however the structural modifications to resveratrol that are
found in Pterostilbene are needed to increase its bioavailability
while preserving the published beneficial activities.* 2,11,12,17,20,21"

[Anthony_Loera]

I am sorry,
I will grant you that many things have more bio-availability than plain old regular res,
however if that is the end of it... it still is far from convincing me that Ptero is somehow better.

The activity shown by res cannot be compared to ptero, so we can't do that kind of comparison.

Now, If we compare it dollars to dollars (Ptero vs Res)... res still beats the pants off of ptero:

This is how I see it:
60 Caps (50mg) of Ptero for 18.99
vs
30 Caps (300mg) of regular everyday Res for 10.99...

Ptero is over 418% more expensive per mg.

Again, if you compare 20% bioavailability vs 80% bioavailability... Res still wins out in my book. Not just in price, but FOX01, SIRT1, P53 activation. If I was a betting man, and if these were the only two horses in the race...

I would surely bet on Res.

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 31 July 2011 - 10:28 PM.

[bluemoon]

This sure looks bad for ChromaDex, although I agree that longer run it shouldn't affect how NR is viewed by scientists or the public. Nobel Laureate Roger Kornberg is on the scientific advisory board so my guess is that ChromaDex's studies have been legit. 

 

 

  

[bluemoon]

there is no point NR would not be legit, we have parallel works done with NMN and knowing NR is just niacinamide with a ribosie, we know it can enter cell.. so its a real direct precursor for NAD+, this is out of discussion. However, im really shock since I really thought chromadex was a stable company and I couldnt even imagin that happened

 

I'm saying there is a chance that Chromadex studies may not be aboveboard but for now I assume they are fine. 

 

I  had a somewhat negative feeling toward Chromadex in February when I heard a podcast linked here where the CEO spoke and answered some questions. I don't think it is common for a company that has been around for 16 years to not give quarterly reports and keep their investors in the dark. Yet the CEO promised that was going to change and announced that a Chromadex study would be in a major pure reviewed journal in spring. Did that ever happen? I remember the Science article but didn't think that was ChromaDex related.

 

The allegation against ChromaDex is that they faked the profitability of the first quarter of 2016, but we'll have to wait and see to what the Feds find.  

[Bryan_S]

I've looked over as much as I can dig up and the SEC Filing naming a Customer C is where Chris Drose of Bleecker Street Research says there is smoke.

 

 

OK let's dig into the SA article allegations:

 

And more importantly, the supposed profitability appears to be engineered. It is likely fake.

We can see by reading the 10-Q that Q1 revenues increased by about $3 million from the previous quarter. But we can also see that:

That means that of the $3 million increase in revenues, $2 million came from a single undisclosed mystery customer. This is the only way ChromaDex able to post a profit. And even though that mystery customer purchased $2 million of product, the total profit shown for the quarter was just a mere $256,000. Something doesn't add up here. "During the three months ended April 2, 2016, Customer C in our ingredients segment accounted for 27.4% of the Company's total sales."

 

 

So who is customer C? This is where Chris Drose initially creates doubt with a "mystery customer" and he infers that these are engineered numbers and uses the word likely so if he's wrong it wont com back to bit him. He doesn't directly discount the academic studies, what he does is call into question the promotions arm of Barry Honig for their rise to success. As you read the article he doesn't directly connect ChromaDex to any wrong doing, he makes a case of association to other parties. One director Hugh Dunkerley who left ChromaDex in May was named in a federal case. Drose claimed ChromaDex swept this information under the rug. This Barry Honig has also being associated with 2 people trying to stay out of jail for SEC violations. That article also say's "Honig has never been arrested or charged by the SEC for his role in investing in microcap stocks."

 

I performed a PACER court documents search and found only one case: 8:11-cv-01273-CJC-MLG Chromadex Inc v. Biotavia Bioceuticals LLC they are not involved in anything else I can find and this case appears settled.

 

​So what can you say its a loose framework of associations to people who have been arrested or are under investigation. This customer C constitutes a large piece of revenue and Chris Drose says these numbers are likely faked. So either way the damage is done after the last 2 days. Chris Drose could be way off base but he puts it in such a way that you can't prove he's wrong and you can't prove he's right. So in my estimation a ton of ChromaDex capital was swept into the hands of Bleecker Street Research, ChromaDex is also about to be swept under the debt of shareholder litigation.

 

So if your trading this stock don't take my cursory scan as enough information to make a trade. I find these company deformation practices for financial gain disgusting. First off if you're a stockholder you can't disprove the allegations fast enough so you sell your shares. Its not a pretty picture. I'd considered purchasing but as a OTC stock it was to thinly traded. Then as a NASDAQ stock the added liquidity set it up yesterdays short raid, plus I thought it was overvalued and was waiting for it to pull back.

 

Lets hope the product can continue past this.

Edited by Bryan_S, 21 June 2016 - 08:52 PM.

[HappyPaul]

I've looked over as much as I can dig up and the SEC Filing naming a Customer C is where Chris Drose of Bleecker Street Research says there is smoke.

 

 

OK let's dig into the SA article allegations:

 

And more importantly, the supposed profitability appears to be engineered. It is likely fake.

We can see by reading the 10-Q that Q1 revenues increased by about $3 million from the previous quarter. But we can also see that:

That means that of the $3 million increase in revenues, $2 million came from a single undisclosed mystery customer. This is the only way ChromaDex able to post a profit. And even though that mystery customer purchased $2 million of product, the total profit shown for the quarter was just a mere $256,000. Something doesn't add up here. "During the three months ended April 2, 2016, Customer C in our ingredients segment accounted for 27.4% of the Company's total sales."

 

 

So who is customer C? This is where Chris Drose initially creates doubt with a "mystery customer" and he infers that these are engineered numbers and uses the word likely so if he's wrong it wont com back to bit him. He doesn't directly discount the academic studies, what he does is call into question the promotions arm of Barry Honig for their rise to success. As you read the article he doesn't directly connect ChromaDex to any wrong doing, he makes a case of association to other parties. One director Hugh Dunkerley who left ChromaDex in May was named in a federal case. Drose claimed ChromaDex swept this information under the rug. This Barry Honig has also being associated with 2 people trying to stay out of jail for SEC violations. That article also say's "Honig has never been arrested or charged by the SEC for his role in investing in microcap stocks."

 

I performed a PACER court documents search and found only one case: 8:11-cv-01273-CJC-MLG Chromadex Inc v. Biotavia Bioceuticals LLC they are not involved in anything else I can find and this case appears settled.

 

​So what can you say its a loose framework of associations to people who have been arrested or are under investigation. This customer C constitutes a large piece of revenue and Chris Drose says these numbers are likely faked. So either way the damage is done after the last 2 days. Chris Drose could be way off base but he puts it in such a way that you can't prove he's wrong and you can't prove he's right. So in my estimation a ton of ChromaDex capital was swept into the hands of Bleecker Street Research, ChromaDex is also about to be swept under the debt of shareholder litigation.

 

So if your trading this stock don't take my cursory scan as enough information to make a trade. I find these company deformation practices for financial gain disgusting. First off if you're a stockholder you can't disprove the allegations fast enough so you sell your shares. Its not a pretty picture. I'd considered purchasing but as a OTC stock it was to thinly traded. Then as a NASDAQ stock the added liquidity set it up yesterdays short raid, plus I thought it was overvalued and was waiting for it to pull back.

 

Lets hope the product can continue past this.

This is confusing and I don’t claim to have it all or all correct but I see things that worry me. I acknowledge I am somewhat a babe in the woods when it comes to the details here and for all I know every small cap IPO is littered with messes like are claimed here but I see things that have me concerned.  I don’t claim everything I have here is even correct and welcome any corrections. I have no position in ChromaDex at this point but do want NR to do well. 

 

 

In my mind all ChromaDex needs to do is identify who is the Customer C to help blunt much of the attack.  Was it an "Arms length" firm?  How difficulty would it be to identify who this was and verify they made the purchase and used the product?  I am concerned that this was not addressed.  The report by the “college kid” was specific and in my mind it deserved a specific response, particularly to this point.  If the sales figures can be verified beyond “customer C” then the rest can be far more easily dismissed as an inevitable result of how difficult and unglamorous OTC companies are funded and brought up. 

 

 

I have read that Frank would not do anything that hurts the company he has run for so long, which has a product I know actually works for me.  Also that they paid off debt.  I was happy to see that.  These are valid points but there are also valid questions involving the investment of Hoing and others and their perceived history.  Again to me this is completely secondary once light is shed on who were the actual customers and who is customer C.

 

 

Yes board member Dunkerley left, and in the SEC document it stated that “the other Defendants used the proceeds for their personal benefit, including to purchase luxury goods, pay the criminal defense costs of John Galanis and Jason Galanis in a previously charged case, boost the net capital of two broker-dealers in which Archer and Cooney had interests, and finance the initial public offering of "Technology Company," a corporation in which Jason Galanis, Hirst, Cooney, Dunkerley and Archer held shares, and for which Jason Galanis served as an "advisor."  Paragraph 7 on page 4 here  https://www.sec.gov/...p-pr2016-85.pdf

 

 

Dunkerley, the ChromaDex board member who left it seems was involved with Code Rebel while acting as as Managing Director of Burnham Securities.  Code Rebel’s stock seems to have come out of the gate at $40 and a year or so later is at .08.  http://www.nasdaq.co...rbq/stock-chart

 

Paragraph 20 from SEC on page 8 "

 

Dunkerley, age 41, resides in Paris, France and Huntington Beach, California. At relevant times herein, he served as the Director, President, Executive Vice President and Secretary of Valor Group, Director of Wealth-Assurance, Director of Valor life and a Managing Director of Burnham Securities. He is currently Sole Director and President of W APCC and Managing Member of BFG Socially Responsible Investing Limited ("BFG Investments"), having been installed in each of these management positions by Jason Galanis. At all relevant times, Dunkerley acted at the direction of Jason Galanis or with his knowledge." https://www.sec.gov/...p-pr2016-85.pdf

 

Managing Director Dunkerley of Burnham Securities Dunkerley and Code Rebel dealings are partially listed here.  https://www.lawinsid...ment/2015-05-14

 

 

Sitting ChromaDex board member Reid Dabney, 64, has served as a director of the Company and has chaired the Audit Committee since October 2007.  Mr. Dabney is the Company’s audit committee financial expert.  Since November 2014 to the present, he has served as the chief financial officer and secretary of Code Rebel Corporation (NASDAQ: CDRB)   http://investors.chr...nN1YnNpZD01Nw==

 

 

 

Given what happened with Code Rebel, was having two board members involved with them (given their performance), a prudent move for Chromadex?  I wish the SEC identified the unnamed “Technology Company” . 

 

 

The ‘College Kid’s” report came out early yesterday, I didn’t see it as it was pulled by the time I saw the stock had moved massively, ChromaDex was rebounding at that point and I bought more.   Mid-day the report was live again, I read it and saw enough that concerned me and I bailed and I lost money on the shares I bought yesterday but possibly not the ones I had for over a year.  I am not sure if I am overall up or down on all my purchases but I definitely lost on those I bought yesterday.

 

 

Is me selling  what the report by the college kid was intended to do, absolutely but that does not mean what was in it was wrong.  I want ChromaDex to show me it is wrong, that the largest innuendo that Customer C is an ‘Arms Length and real customer, that they bought it and used it.  Do that and I am more than willing to look past that some early investors may be colorful and chalk it all up to that this is the nature of small cap companies.  I am willing to look past that ChromaDex had two board members involved with Code Rebel which spectacularly went from near $40 at their IPO to a trading halt and now 8 cents in a year, provided there is some sort of change in direction in how things are handled and ChromaDex.   I want ChromaDex to be healthly and I want to be in the stock again but ChromaDex needs to do far more to respond than the very brief and unspecific statement yesterday which only discussed the motivations behind the author, not the content.

 

 

 

Don't trade on anything I write here because I don't claim to be an expert but a simple personal investor trying to figure it all out myself.  

Edited by HappyPaul, 21 June 2016 - 11:40 PM.

[Harkijn]

It looks like Chromadex just got something extra to worry about.

 

This interview with Frank Church of Harvard University is exciting reading as a whole but also touches on the subject of NMNprecursors. With his advanced CRISPR technology it is possible to activate a protein called TFAM to produce extra NMN so more NAD+ will be available and NAD/NADH ratio improves. In this scenario no need to take supps that may or may not reach the cells. This scenario is moving really fast.

http://www.lifeexten...16/CRISPR/index

In an additional interview in the same issue TFAM activation is called 'surprisingly easy' !

[Tom Andre F. (ex shinobi)]

It looks like Chromadex just got something extra to worry about.

 

This interview with Frank Church of Harvard University is exciting reading as a whole but also touches on the subject of NMNprecursors. With his advanced CRISPR technology it is possible to activate a protein called TFAM to produce extra NMN so more NAD+ will be available and NAD/NADH ratio improves. In this scenario no need to take supps that may or may not reach the cells. This scenario is moving really fast.

http://www.lifeexten...16/CRISPR/index

In an additional interview in the same issue TFAM activation is called 'surprisingly easy' !

 

Its bit old but I agree 100% that such method would be the only realistic way to decrease aging. Or any others that can control NQO1

 

EDIT: Bryan, since you did lot of research on the topic, dont you think we should actually try to control Nampt and rejuvenate it ? or does control the NAD+/NADH ratio will be enough ?

Edited by Tom Andre F. (ex shinobi), 22 June 2016 - 10:51 AM.

[Valijon]

Chromadex keeps a tight grip on prices. You'll be hard pressed to find 60 125mg capsules for less than thirty dollars. These money grubbers charge between 30 to 50 dollars for this amount and oftentimes more. Its one reason I'm only neutral to it. I believe they overcharge in comparison to the benefits.

Edited by Valijon, 02 May 2017 - 02:58 AM.

[midas]

 

 I have been taking niagen for about 5 years at 250mg on MWF only.

 

I didn't realize HPN had been around that long but NR has been a thing for more than 5 years now so it makes sense.

 

Chromadex launched Niagen less than 4 years ago... http://investors.chr...icle&ID=1824773
 

Edited by Michael, 02 May 2017 - 08:29 PM.
trim quotes

[Valijon]

I'll see what I can find Michael. Itd be great though if chromadex would stop all this price fixing. Should I short some Chromadex Mikedc?

[MikeDC]

I'll see what I can find Michael. Itd be great though if chromadex would stop all this price fixing. Should I short some Chromadex Mikedc?

Mortgage your house and short it.

[Valijon]

They keep losing money like they did last quarter and I'll be purchasing a mansion with my profits.

[MikeDC]

They keep losing money like they did last quarter and I'll be purchasing a mansion with my profits.

Tell me at which price you short it.

[Mike C]

http://observer.com/...nvest-chromadex

Does he know something we don't?

[MikeDC]

http://observer.com/...nvest-chromadex

Does he know something we don't?

I don't think so. He is just smarter than most investment bankers.
I wish I have more money to investment in CDXC. It is no brainer for 100x gain in 5 years. Yesterday was the last dip. All good news going forward.

[midas]

 

 

ChromaDex Q1 2017 Conference Call

Thursday, May 11, 2017, 4:30 pm EDT  

Full audio: http://edge.media-se...t8in2vhy/lan/en

 

Much good news here for Chromadex's Niagen and its stockholders, but not for consumers of Niagen, i.e., price UP, # of vendors DOWN

 

Thanks Oakman, that was interesting and has given plenty of food for thought....

 

After listening to that me thinks that some more good news is in the pipeline for NR.....I also think ...They already know something VERY positive that we, as yet don't....This would explain why Chromadex have decided to take more control over the product and regulate price. They have obviously not been happy about the recent price discounts due to competition between sellers. ..

 

Weeding out untrusted sellers is also a great step to take

 

 

http://observer.com/...nvest-chromadex

Does he know something we don't?

 

 

Well, if I were him and I was thinking of investing $25 million I would have run my own independent little trial in China to see if I was going down the right road with NR... I suspect that he does know something we don't...

Edited by Michael, 13 May 2017 - 02:38 PM.
trim quotes

[warner]

They already know something VERY positive that we, as yet don't....This would explain why Chromadex have decided to take more control over the product and regulate price. They have obviously not been happy about the recent price discounts due to competition between sellers. They feel it is going to devalue a massively marketable product....

Or they can see that NR results have been a mixed bag, with the obvious question of whether higher-molar doses of NAM make more sense in most cases, and whether NR is of much use at all in younger healthy adults.  Perhaps they are anticipating NR's future use to be confined to specific diseases and conditions, and are preparing to price it accordingly.  They may also be anticipating a backlash from all those healthy customers who spent a lot of money on an anti-aging supplement that had little effect.

 

Anyway, here's another study showing NAM is effective in treating glaucoma in mice:

Nicotinamide and WLDS Act Together to Prevent Neurodegeneration in Glaucoma

http://journal.front...2017.00232/full

 

on the heel's of their original study:

Vitamin B3 modulates mitochondrial vulnerability and prevents glaucoma in aged mice

https://www.ncbi.nlm...pubmed/28209901

[HappyPaul]

http://observer.com/...nvest-chromadex

Does he know something we don't?

From the transcripts of the call "Recently we announced an investment led by Mr. Li Ka-Shing and the team at Horizon's Ventures. Mr. Li and Horizon's Ventures are very accomplished strategic investors that see the category of healthy aging as an emerging high growth opportunity.

We've closed the initial tranche of a private placement of $3.5 million which was announced on Thursday April 27th and we are now working on closing the second tranche which we are expecting to close sometime over the next one to two weeks. "

He has invested $3.5M so far not $25M.    It will be interesting to see what happens in one to two weeks with the second purchase. 

[Valijon]

Its all speculation until the results of more independent trials are in. Do we know what kinds of operational costs and loans Chromadex has? How well is this actually selling? We have 222k users of NR worldwide currently. What kind of growth are they projecting? These are just a few sample questions regarding business aspects that we need to know about before investing in a company such as this as a long buyer.

[bluemoon]

The guy at the end asking for Chromadex's top two heads to roll certainly wasn't a  happy investor! I mostly agree with him when he said "It's just the same old same old."   

 

Why would Chromadex care what the vendor's price for NR is? Chromadx still gets the price that they are able to get from the vendors. I can understand if Chromadex stopped selling to a few vendors who they thought were harming the reputation of NR/Chromadex through unfounded claims, but they hint they may still sell NR to some vendors. How would selling to just five vendors be any different than selling to 40? However, the "clearing the field" talk makes it sound like Chromadex will soon sell to no vendors apart from food and skin care companies like P&G as it alone sells NR as a supplement. 

 

It also looks like Chromadex may wait until August or September to release the "top line data", another vague statement from the company. At the last meeting the CEO thought those results would be released in June or July but that has become "Q2 or Q3" so any day between now and September 30th. 

[Valijon]

If you allow pricing of your product to get too low you debase the value of the brand in the eyes of the consumer. This is one reason companies implement Minimum Advertised Pricing. I had a retail business and I can tell you that M.A.P. is very strategically important.

[bluemoon]

If you allow pricing of your product to get too low you debase the value of the brand in the eyes of the consumer. This is one reason companies implement Minimum Advertised Pricing. I had a retail business and I can tell you that M.A.P. is very strategically important.

 

I thought of that but all prices I see cluster around $25 to $35 with most closer to $30 a month at 250 mg a day. Selling at $25 a month in no way makes Niagen or Chromadex look cheap since close to the average.

 

 

By the way, if Elysium will no longer sell Basis by the end of the year, they could pull the study from peer review so that its results don't get published.  There is a lot that is unknown. Could Elysium have a better product coming and no longer care about NR? Could Chromadex be bought out for its patents on NR, say by Elysium, and then be shut down?

 

It is also interesting that Elysium got a $20 million infusion last year while Li Ka- Ching just invested $25 million in Chromadex. I'm not sure what that amount of money gets either company.   

 

Also, since Elysium said they would publish any results, positive or negative, on their website but haven't after six months, makes me think deciding on the dose to promote has become a big issue. Chromadex hinted at that at the recent meeting, as well.

[Valijon]

If you allow pricing of your product to get too low you debase the value of the brand in the eyes of the consumer. This is one reason companies implement Minimum Advertised Pricing. I had a retail business and I can tell you that M.A.P. is very strategically important.

I thought of that but all prices I see cluster around $25 to $35 with most closer to $30 a month at 250 mg a day. Selling at $25 a month in no way makes Niagen or Chromadex look cheap since close to the average.


By the way, if Elysium will no longer sell Basis by the end of the year, they could pull the study from peer review so that its results don't get published. There is a lot that is unknown. Could Elysium have a better product coming and no longer care about NR? Could Chromadex be bought out for its patents on NR, say by Elysium, and then be shut down?

It is also interesting that Elysium got a $20 million infusion last year while Li Ka- Ching just invested $25 million in Chromadex. I'm not sure what that amount of money gets either company.

Also, since Elysium said they would publish any results, positive or negative, on their website but haven't after six months, makes me think deciding on the dose to promote has become a big issue. Chromadex hinted at that at the recent meeting, as well.

Are they cutting everyone out? Will they be the only seller? I'm thinking they want $50 a month for NR. They can increase profits by cutting out the middle man now that awareness has been raised for NR and there's a loyal market. Will there be a takeover? Hard to say at this point. Keep an eye on the stock. News always leaks a day or two in advance.

[bluemoon]

 

Are they cutting everyone out? Will they be the only seller? I'm thinking they want $50 a month for NR. They can increase profits by cutting out the middle man now that awareness has been raised for NR and there's a loyal market. Will there be a takeover? Hard to say at this point. Keep an eye on the stock. News always leaks a day or two in advance.

 

 

Chromadex added at the end of the discussion on going retail that they would maybe consider keeping sales open to a few vendors, but I don't see how that makes sense. The upset investor reminded the CEO that the last time Chromadex went the retail route a few years ago that it was a disaster. It looks like Chromadex will be competing against Elysium's next product, whatever that may be.     

[midas]

What maybe going over peoples heads here is that Sinclair recently announced NMN could be on the market as a big thing within the next five years. Chromadex have announced they will be marketing NR themselves....Both have one thing in common, they raise NAD. Also a big multimillion dollar Chinese investment in Niagen.......coincidence?....I don't think so.

 

Also Guarente (Elysium health/ Basis) and Sinclair worked together in the past, Guarente being Sinclair's mentor at MIT. Elysium Health put financial pressure on Chromadex recently out of the blue risking there only supply of NR. Sinclair announces an NMN based wonder pill within five years.......Far more to this than we know as far as I'm concerned!

 

[MikeDC]

Elysium will pickup NMN planned or forced?
They don't have a lock on NMN neither. So their fight with
ChromoDex is extremely hard to understand.