PLSIA (Premier Laser Systems) 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 : PLSIA (Premier Laser Systems)

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Glenn Perry who wrote (1532)	4/15/1998 9:01:00 AM
From: Sr K	Read Replies (1) of 1773

The simple answer is of course it's a problem. But there are still questions. <<Schein prefers that any future orders be placed on a fully contingent basis>> does not say "insists". The impass is about taking delivery and paying by set terms or as sold with a right to return. I assume that Schein wants to sell the product(s) but under improved working capital arrangements. Premier wants to sell the way the LOI was worded. There may be a dispute about LOI vs. Purchase Order Agreement, which details we don't know. If Premier adjusts the pricing to reflect the working capital shift, I think in the long run it makes little difference. Schein may even push the product better if they have a lower working capital requirement. It is now apparent that Schein notified Premier in March, but Premier tried to resolve this with Schein until this week. I think they could have been more forthcoming about their operating results. If $2.5 m sales from Q3 is restated to Q4, about 5 - 6 cents shifts, leaving Q3 with a 2 - 3 cent loss, compared to the reported 3 cent profit diluted.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next