Cryolife may have problems beyond continued supply of Hemostase

A new non-clinical video comparing Hemostase (AKA Arista) with PerClot indicates Cryolife may have problems beyond continued supply of Hemostase. The video indicates a much stronger absorptive capacity for PerClot manufactured by SMI. The non-clinical video available HERE on Youtube appears to be an internal SMI validation of their product. Meanwhile the Medafor rejected proposal and (what appears to be imminent divorce) of the Medafor-Cryolife marriage is being thrashed out publicly in a curiously tabloid fashion.

Recently Medafor CEO Gary Shope stated "we no longer believe that CryoLife can be viewed as a trustworthy partner" and on March 18, 2010 after notifying CryoLife that it was treating the EDA as terminated, Medafor notified CryoLife that it would not fulfill their order.

Gary Shope, CEO of Medafor, has also stated, "Over the past six months, CryoLife has repeatedly breached our contract in China, Europe, Brazil and the U.S. CryoLife has also continued to insist that it is entitled to distribute HemoStase in China and Japan, despite the clear terms of the EDA to the contrary . As such, we were highly concerned about whether CryoLife was going to honor our agreement in the future, and had no choice but to insist it provide us assurance, as required by law. CryoLife ignored our request, effectively repudiating the contract and allowing us to cease all performance under the agreement.” Under the agreement, CryoLife had the exclusive right to sell the MPH product into cardiac and vascular surgeries in the United States (excluding Department of Defense facilities) and into cardiac, vascular and general surgeries in the rest of the World (except China and Japan ) excluding ENT, orthopedic, neurosurgery and topical applications.

Both Cryolife and Medafor have made no secret of their mutual dissatisfaction with each other, Cryolife has created a site dedicated to public laundering of their difficulties HERE and includes the following:

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did CryoLife acquire a stake in Medafor? How much of Medafor does CryoLife now own? What were the terms of the proposal CryoLife made most recently to Medafor? What was the breakdown between cash and stock? What has been the reaction of Medafor’s board to the recent CryoLife proposal? Why has CryoLife chosen to make its communications with Medafor’s board public? Is the proposal that CryoLife made to the Medafor board and that it has now withdrawn available to Medafor shareholders? What can Medafor shareholders who wish to sell their shares to CryoLife do? Why did CryoLife purchase additional shares from some investors but not make its proposal available to all? How has Medafor failed to help HemoStase reach its full potential? What will CryoLife do differently? How did CryoLife arrive at its most recent proposed acquisition price? Does CryoLife’s Medafor stake give CryoLife any additional powers outside those of a normal shareholder? Why did CryoLife withdraw its offer? What are CryoLife’s next steps? When does CryoLife plan to communicate with Medafor shareholders? Why did CryoLife file a lawsuit against Medafor? Why is Medafor claiming that CryoLife repudiated its distribution agreement and what is CryoLife’s response? Why would Medafor continually attempt to put revenues at risk and expose itself to additional litigation with this fourth attempt to terminate the agreement? Why would Medafor decline to ship product for additional revenue? Who can shareholders contact if they have questions? While Medafor respond on their website HERE