Thanks for the info Gordon. Certainly doesn't give me a warm and fuzzy about Carl. However, these types of venture capitalists aren't the Grandma next door. If you want to make a lot of money, you've got to risk a lot. Certainly with Carl's previous ventures that went under, he "lost". Not every idea/investment wins. Founders/original investors (risk takers) of a company are sure to win out big no matter what, in comparison to us lowly shareholders. Look at Gates, Eisner, Woodruff, etc.. This list goes on. In fact, Carl's "gains" in Valence haven't been that spectacular given the promise of what they can (and will) be.
Hell, look at Oracle yesterday. I almost got out of the "speculative trading" arena a few months back to put my money in a "safe stock", like Oracle. I would've bought at around $35. Now it's $20 and change! In the market, there's no such thing as a safe stock. Merck in the mid 90s (after Hilliary's health care scandal) would've taken me a few years to recoup my investment. Granted, an Oracle or Merck won't fold, but dead money for 3 - 5 years (even 10 in Eastman Kodak's situation) is almost as bad.
It still looks like we're on for a Qtr 1 98 launch. Cal Reed maybe wanted to "postpone" for perfection reasons and Carl didn't want to deal with any further delays. We can speculate until we're blue in the face. I'm just waiting on official word from the company. |
