JM:
In response, though I disagree with your characterization of my "assumptions", I will reply to each point:
"Assumption 1" He is assuming that because the two
officers of Presstek were (novelly) held responsible for
the content of those analysts' reports they "caused to
be distributed," they have irreparably damaged the
company beyond what its product and performance will
soon remedy. (Didn't stop Fuji!)"
There is nothing novel about the SEC settlement. Further, the company as an operation wasn't damaged, its reputation among any mutual funds, professional investors was. This will many years to repair. The street does not like being mislead. Fuji is irrelavant.
"Assumption 2:He is assuming that
Heidelberg is almost history, and it demonstrably isn't.
He is assuming that Fuji is unimportant, and that is one
dangerous assumption.
Heidelberg may well be history, engineering fees have stoped, orders have been reduced, and multiple strategic alliances have been formed with Presstek competitors. What other assumption is there?
"Assumption 3: He is assuming that Fuji is unimportant, and that is one dangerous assumption. "
Not true, I have stated I don't know what Fuji is, the press release is typically "Presstek vague". I do assume however, that the economic benefits, if any, are more than a year away.
"Assumption 4: He is assuming that the reason
Presstek maintains a certain confidentiality regarding
the detail of its work with Heidelberg and Fuji and
others I won't bother to list (he assumes they
effectually don't exist anyway) is not what their press
release states, that Heidelberg and Fuji require
confidentiality of them (for the sort of competitive
business reasons explained by Loren, for example,) but
because they are liars keeping business secrets from us
that Heidelberg and Fuji would be perfectly happy to have
revealed to their competition"
Close. Presstek has never been shy about Press before. 100 kit shipped, 500th kit shipped, 750 th kit shipped etc. What is interesting, is that as the news become less favorable, they now claim requirements of confidentiality. It may well be a part of the contract, the question is, who asked for it, Presstek or Fuji/Hdlbrg.
Further, for 2 years we have read about Prst's inviolable patents. If the product is protected by "ironclad" patents, what is the competition going to do? You can't have it both ways.
"Assumption 5: He assumes there won't be
significant new alliances with other companies who see
what Fuji saw."
Wrong, I assume there will be. Its the nature fo the printing business. As for what Fuji saw, perhaps you can define the deal from the press release, I can't. I don't believe any of these alliance will make up the loss of DI shipments, engineering fees and royalties lost as a result of the Heidelberg reduction.
"Assumption 6:He assumes Presstek's "wall of patents"
is no problem for its competition"
I have no assumption as to patents, only market size.
"Assumption 7:He assumes if he says
the same things over and over again readers of the
thread will forget the replies that have been posted to
his assumptions, and that those of us who defend this
stock will get tired of repeating themselves."
This isn't worthy of response. |
