Re: "As a matter of fact, I did answer the question. In my first post, I delineated the reasons I think the good doctor has NOT shown an improvement in business sense."
Your first post simply didn't answer the question you've asked of me, namely, "How has management's business sense improved?" From the get go, i've implied the truth, namely that I don't deny - I even outwardly note - the same bad points you do. I just find your starkly negative conclusion illogical. You follow Fonar, and yet have failed in your first post to mention - let alone analyze - the value of the research done since the suits were won, the value of the proprietary patented product now being sold, the potential value of Fonar's existing capacity to supply product for more sales (if Fonar failed to meet demand, any basher might rightly complain), the value of maintenance on current installations of Fonar equipment both new and old, the value of the recent national Advertising campaign, and the value of having Damadian and compatriot now having bought Fonar shares on the open market. You offered a negative conclusion and the meaningless ad hominem "frittered" without noted reason, and without addressing points noted here, all of which I expect you were well aware of beforehand. Assuming you began with an adequate knowledge of these matters, I find your leading omissions very curious and suggestive of the possibility that you have a vested interest bias against Fonar. Certainly you haven't answered your question in a manner which would carry sway with me, just as you haven't addressed points made in Fonar's favor at all. Of course, unless you accept the premise of your question, namely, that management indeed improved in some way, you'll never be able to answer your question for anyone.
Fonar IS beating the competition in this way: they are helping folks the competition fails to help. That's a point which plainly has driven real sales, and may continue to do so (no doubt to your smiling observance, if so, eh?).
Dan B. |
