The real promise of a stem cell-based approach for cardiac regeneration and repair lies in the promotion of myogenesis and angiogenesis at the site of the cell graft to achieve both structural and functional benefits. Despite all of the progress and promise in this field, many unanswered questions remain; the answers to these questions will provide the much-needed breakthrough to harness the real benefits of cell therapy for the heart in the clinical perspective. One of the major issues is the choice of donor cell type for transplantation. Multiple cell types with varying potentials have been assessed for their ability to repopulate the infarcted myocardium; however, only the adult stem cells, that is, skeletal myoblasts (SkM) and bone marrow-derived stem cells (BMC), have been translated from the laboratory bench to clinical use. Which of these two cell types will provide the best option for clinical application in heart cell therapy remains arguable. With results pouring in from the long-term follow-ups of previously conducted phase I clinical studies, and with the onset of phase II clinical trials involving larger population of patients, transplantation of stem cells as a sole therapy without an adjunct conventional revascularization procedure will provide a deeper insight into the effectiveness of this approach. The present article discusses the pros and cons of using SkM and BMC individually or in combination for cardiac repair, and critically analyzes the progress made with each cell type.