Okay. I wrote the last message in the middle of the night and it has so many typos I think it needs a translater. I'm going to rewrite it below, hopefully unencrypted. I'm sorry to make you read it twice but try to ignore the last version? This might make more sense:
Bruce,
I take people at their word till proven otherwise. So I will take your word that you have no connection with Zonagen other than as a stockholder.
I don't agree with the logic of a lot of your accusations. Yes, I'm familiar with the inaccuracy of reportage. As a newsmaker, I've seen it. But I've also published (not recently) hundreds of reviews and found the editors scrupulous about verifying my findings. There was a lot of pressure from the industry when I negatively reviewed a product, but the editors backed me (after assigning a special editor to validate my results). I believe that FORTUNE is the sort of magazine that would make equally scrupulous efforts at accuracy. They would otherwise be sued and would have liability. This isn't a fly-by-night paper nor a newspaper with a daily deadline, but an established monthly magazine.
This article was not time sensitive so it would have been held as long as necessary to have been validated. Further, monthlies can have a long lead time, so the articles have to be approved well in advance of the magazine going to bed. There's a lot of planning for a monthly, and one can't easily insert a seven page piece. No, I don't believe for a moment that it was "timed" to coincide with a Schering event. Nor do I believe that Asensio was given more credence than any other sources.
As for consistency, yes, I learned that one of the authors changed his mind. I changed my mind, too. I think that's a sign of someone who is willing to think and to constantly review the data. I don't see that as a fault. There was also a co-author. Nothing has been said by you to try to discredit him and he is being ignored by those who are claiming Whitaker is a member of a sinister group of plotters against Zonagen.
You are trying to say that all positive articles are objective and all negative articles are the result of a plot to destroy Zonagen. I just don't buy it. I think the evidence against Zonagen has mounted to be voluminous and cannot be dismissed any longer.
I think some longs are trying to shore up the stock with constant hype and that some shorts are also trying to down the stock with constant hype. I don't think either such camp has enough clout to effect the price forever without truth being on their side. I object to the idea of there being wealthy and well organized shorts attacking the stock without the acknowledgement that there are wealthy and well organized longs who are hyping the stock. I guess I see them as balancing each other out, while the majority of the investors are watching.
I don't see any evidence to conclude that the FORTUNE article reflects a plot against the company. I think that's a desperate and imaginative argument, but not based on any facts that have been provided. The fact that Whitaker changed his mind about the company, over time, is not an argument that he is "in bed" with Asensio. It is an argument, in my view, that he may be a reasonable and thinking person.
Linda |
