Chromatics Color Sciences International. Inc; CCSI Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Chromatics Color Sciences International. Inc; CCSI

CCSI 23.53

+1.8%

10:21 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: JanyBlueEyes who wrote (618)	12/18/1997 12:10:00 AM
From: poodle	Read Replies (1) of 5736

Jane, thank you for your post. It looks like we do not understand each other. I will do my best to be well understandable. Market size (US) CCSI: 330 M $ Tests: 15M SpectrX : 100 M$ about 20$ each Tests: 5M This company is in the same bussiness. Management has NO ANY REASON to UNDERESTIMATE market size. (Can you explain the difference between two management's estimations?) Because CCSI will get money not from patients (or ins), but from service providers, we need per test cost to calculate potential market size. 2.2$ It is from SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL. People who wrote it were VERY POSITIVE about noninvasive technology. Please, look at the title: "Transcutaneous Bilirubinometry Decreases the Need for Serum Bilirubin Measurements and Saves Money." One of the main conclusions is: "saves money". Why should they UNDERESTIMATE the PRICE OF OLD METHODS? The results of calculations were: CCSI: 33M$ SpectrX: 11M$ I explained the reason why I would trust SpectrX more. That's my estimation of the size of "bilirubin" market today. For ALL competitors. Please, tell me where you agree or disagree and what your calculations are. You may also have estimation of potential earnings from other products, as well as possible stock price and P/E calculations. Negotiations: It seems to be logical for the company to have an agreement well before FDA approval (IMHO) to be able to start to supply product immediately. Looks like CCSI have already lost about a year. That's not only earning that they did not get, but also competitors coming. Such negotiations seems to be very expensive. Even not an ideal deal could be more profitable. Well, it is more than 12 o'clock again. I have to check a lot of other posts. Have a good night.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next