I second your thanks for the fine summaries. I concur with your statement < (no doubt deliberately subdued for legal reasons) was still very positive - things are proceeding according to plan albeit somewhat slower than anticipated.> !!!.but maybe not as slowly as you were led to believe!! Here's why.
I was expecting, as with the last conf. call, a very conservative set of timetables etc. I believe it to be conservative in the extreme this time when compared with information recently given individual shareholders calling for an update.
When the primary spokesman picks up the phone, It has been my experience, and that of others, that he does his best to answer the question directly based on the immediate situation. He doesn't stop to build in a safety margin appear to check first with his legal department.
It has been understood that the first four production lines have been on order since early this year, and , if all goes well, that the first three lines are expected to be production qualified by the end of 1997 and the fourth in first quarter of '98 and company cell testing 30-60 days. I heard this from a company spokesman, and am aware of others who have heard it also.
Cal Reed said today that the overall schedule is pretty much on track. If this is true, than so should the timetable described in the above paragraph.
If he states an expectation that a production line will be in operation by late '98, who would be upset if it happens 8 months sooner? That approach would certainly reduce the phone calls asking if it was ready. I believe we are being "set up", to be pleasantly surprised before we become worried about the timetable, giving the company some breathing space in the process. |
