John Westergaard, you have written,
<<<In the case of Pluvia vs PLSIA, it does appear that we have uncovered the "smoking gun" and it's not a pretty picture!!!>>>
So far John Westergaard you have lied about me. You have misrepresented my intentions and made false damaging accusations about me. You have made unfounded claims I have conduct illegal activities including fraud and stock manipulation regarding my posts on PLSIA stock boards. When I asked you to stop you did not. When I asked you to retract your statements and apologize you did not. And you still have not. You continue to post a reward for information about me. You continue to post your false allegations about me on your website. You continue to damage my name, my reputation and my business with your bullying tactics.
Now you have threaten to reveal new damaging information about me -- with your "Smoking Gun its not a pretty picture" statement. There is no "Smoking Gun" John, only you blowing smoke.
You imply my motivation for posts regarding PLSIA is due to some sort of financial gain I would achieve by driving down the price of PLSIA, I presume through my connection to ILT, or my ILT stock position. So lets look at these two issues in detail.
I am a ILT equipment user. I buy and use ILT's Laser Tooth Whitening equipment. I had exclusive rights to supply equipment & whitening agents in my area at one time, but don't anymore. My exclusivity did not cost me anything. I have never been paid anything by ILT, never been an employee of ILT or commissioned or un-commissioned sales agent, for ILT. I am just a ILT laser user. End of Story. Furthermore that has been my relationship with ILT since before I started posting a great deal on the PLSIA boards in July.
I purchased stock in ILT on 7/9. Both in my trading account and my trading portfolio which is posted in the Shark Tank boards. In my actual portfolio I sold my ILT stock for a loss on I believe 7/11. Since then I have had no financial interest in ILT stock, although I still hold the ILT position in my posted Shark Tank portfolio. At this point the Shark Tank position is obviously just a paper trade.
In short, here are the facts:
I buy ILT lasers, so I am a ILT laser user/owner. I post my critique of a competitor -- PLSIA. I post facts and opinions about the company, its management, it's product line and its product that compete directly with the ILT Lasers I use. Standard analysis. Facts supplied about PLSIA come from PLSIA employees and the PLSIA CEO.
So how if I were purposely trying to drive down the stock of PLSIA <which I was not>, would I benefit in any imaginable way? Lets take a look at all possible angles.
FINANCIAL MOTIVATION?
I don't own any stock in ILT I don't own any stock in PLSIA. I don't have a short position in PLSIA and I never have had one. Any potential gain in ILT stock would simply make my "paper" trading portfolio look good. The idea thatI have some sort of financial motivation to drive down PLSIA stock is absurd. I have no financial incentive to do this. But lets look closer.
Even though I would not benefit financially by ILT stock going up -- because I don't own any stock -- would there be any logical argument that driving down the price of PLSIA stock would make the price of ILT stock go up? Lets face it -- it wouldn't. There is no historical precedent for this to ever occur on any stock.
In a really far fetched scenario, I guess someone could argue my criticizing PLSIA would convince *potential* PLSIA laser buyers to switch to ILT, thus increasing ILT revenue, which would eventually show up in Q's and move the price of ILT stock up,,, But lets face it, that's pretty far fetched. Back here in reality, ILT's patent should exclude PLSIA from selling anymore whitening lasers anyhow, so any dentists wanting to buy a whitening laser would have to buy from ILT regardless. There goes that possible argument.
OK -- so we have established my motive could not be financial gain of ILT or PLSIA stock -- I don't own any, only a "paper" ILT position in my posted stock portfolio. Furthermore, we have established there is no realistic way that ILT stock would go up as a result of my critique of PLSIA and PLSIA stock going down. Really, with no position in either PLSIA or ILT, there goes ANY argument that I would be critiquing PLSIA to drive the price down for financial gain on the securities. But what about some sort of "competitive edge". Is there any logical argument I could stand to benefit by trying to drive the price of PLSIA down through honest critique of the company? Lets take a look at all the arguments I can think of on this issue.
COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE -- MOTIVATION?
Lets go through all of the argument one by one by asking the question -- "Is there any way that I would gain in my Laser Whitening business by driving down the price of PLSIA stock? How?"
1. The price of PLSIA stock has no bearing whatsoever on the volume of volume of business I do in Laser Tooth Whitening. I flat out would not see any benefit by any price movement of PLSIA stock in terms of increasing my laser whitening business, which is related to how many people get their teeth Laser Whitened in our area using my equipment and dentists.
2. Driving down the price of PLSIA stock wouldn't benefit me in my competition with the local PLSIA dentists for tooth whitening -- Here's why. First of all, ILT was granted a patent on July 8, 1997 which should exclude all but ILT dentists from whitening with any laser -- including all of the PLSIA dentists. Secondly -- I just don't have much in terms of competition for laser whitening. Its my understanding only one of I think four dentists who bought PLSIA lasers has even attempted to whiten teeth with his PLSIA laser, and the results were reportedly inferior. He has reportedly done only 6 cases. We've completed over 600 cases.
3. Driving down the price of PLSIA stock wouldn't benefit me to get the dentists who bought PLSIA lasers to switch to ILT and buy ILT lasers to whiten teeth, because in my area, I would likely be creating competition for myself. Obviously I would not want to do that. Furthermore, I don't make any money if ILT sells lasers, so Westergaard's implication that I am driving down the price of PLSIA to "advance the interests of a competitor ILT" is absurd.
The bottom line is -- I don't see how in the world any argument can be made that my business of laser whitening would receive any benefit by posting critique's of PLSIA on any stock board or why I would ever have a financial motivation to "advance the interests of a competitor".. In fact the notion seems a little outrageous. If I have missed any argument anyone can see on these matters -- please let me know. I will happily answer them.
Given the fact that I have no position in PLSIA or ILT (except a paper one), is there any logical argument that I would have to critique PLSIA and drive the stock down as you say, for my own financial gain? No there is not. No logical reason whatsoever. Which makes a lot of sense, because financial gain, competitive advantage and advancing the interests of a competitor were NEVER my motive for critiquing PLSIA.
I did critique PLSIA because I saw a great deal of misinformation on the PLSIA stock boards that did not meet with my opinion of the status of the company, its products or it's management. When I brought this to light on the PLSIA boards I was met with harsh personal attacks. Not unusual, but it instigated debate which prompted me to further research PLSIA and report additional findings.
Now, some have suggested I would NEVER make the number of posts I did on the PLSIA boards without a financial incentive. Rubbish. I like a good debate, and I don't like to see investors suckered into buying investments based on a lot of Bull HYPE and later getting burned. So I put in my 2 cents worth.
Fortunately for me, I even have a history of this activity. Look at the old TLTK boards. When the stock was 7-9ish I pointed out essentially every serious problem the company had and suggest investors bail. The issues I brought to the board and were dismissed by the likes of VALUSPEC were the issues that destroyed the company. Now in Bankruptcy proceedings, de-listed and trading for pennies in the pink sheets.
Before the company was de-listed I was invited to join an "independent audit review committee" for the company's board of directors, to try to help the shareholders who for so long had attacked me. I joined and spent a number of weeks of 10-12 hour days trying to save a losing cause. I never asked to be paid for that assistance nor did I expect any compensation. For me it was an interesting adventure, and I did it for the sake of curiosity and in the hopes of helping the shareholders who had become good friends from the stock boards that had lost a great deal of money.
That pretty much wraps up the argument as far as if I was trying to drive down the stock of PLSIA for financial gain, competitive advantage or to advance the interests of a competitor. OK, so what else is there? Hmmm I posted by mistake in my other screenname as I admit and explain here post but as all of the people I trade with regularly can tell you, there was nothing remotely sinister about this. Just a mistake when I logged onto AOL. The last log-on name always appears as the default when you get on. I absent mindedly forgot to change my screename from the default as noted in this post --
techstocks.com
I guess all Westergaard has left is the argument I was trying to deceive PLSIA posters by not informing them of my stock position in ILT or my position as a ILT laser user -- except I did disclose this. Both here on the SI PLSIA thread and in many other threads on the Motley Fool Boards stock boards.
Unfortunately for you John Westergaard, your Smoking Gun turns out to be -- You Blowing Smoke. I expect that you will show up again today with no argument to back your damaging claims and no excuse for your actions that have damaged my name my business and my reputation.
What really disgusts me is you have no excuse or apologies for your accusations. You have no evidence to support your lies. What you do have here John is another incident damaging my reputation with completely unfounded accusations. All in what appears to be a publicity stunt to your benefit, with no regard for the very dear cost your actions have had for me and my business.
You appear to be a paid promoter John Westergaard -- paid by Premier Laser Systems to promote Premier and quiet it's critics. And to make matters worse, you do this despicable deed while stepping on the corpses of persons you damage with your lies, to advance and promote your new business venture.
Steve |
