<< I know it's difficult to back off, but you were just plain wrong about the the capital transactions impacting earnings. >>
Originally, I was wrong about these transactions impacting revenues, as was pointed out to me by a few gentlemen on this thread.
At this time, I am not saying that capital transactions impact earnings. I am only saying that capital transactions impact cash on hand in the quarterly report. I think that I know what is going on here. I refer to the quarterly report as the earnings report. I think that this is a question of terminology.
Is that it? When one says "earnings report" does it only refer to the income statement? If so, I am wrong for using the wrong term. I usually say "earnings report" when I mean "quarterly report".
From now on, I will use "quarterly report" instead. That might end the confusion.
So......... to restate: the infusion of cash from the warrants and from the Elan deal should show up nicely on the quarterly report.
<< Robert, a call for $30 in the near term seems stupid! >>
Usually, IMHO, when an analyst does not state the time period, it is a one year prediction. So, I would think that Jim McCamant, was predicting $30 by 2000.
<< If you really think Mudcat is just a naysayer I suggest you not give him an opportunity to look smart. >>
I offer the entire thread an apology for doing this.
Regards, and good luck, Bob
|
