wpckr: "I find your loose talk about going under to be offensive in its implication and suggestion of impending bankruptcy with nothing more than a late audit report to back it up."
Wrong. In post 587 on this thread I analyzed the DCHT's numbers, based on the information available on its website. Unless the company intentionally posted false information (given its Antaeus lie that is a possibility, although I would have expected it to post numbers that are more positive than reality, not the opposite) DCHT was down to much less than a half million in cash, and in 1998 was losing it at a rate of over $300,000 per month. The expected delivery rate of products, times the plausible profit margin on them, wouldn't make up the difference, not to mention the capital required to finance inventories and receivables.
That is why I think the company is just about out of cash, not because the audit still isn't available long after it was originally promised.
"If their technology is viable there are a host of large well healed companies that are playing ball with DCHT that might be willing to back them or own the technology outright. Allied Signal perhaps is one."
How come, if all these big companies are "playing ball" with DCHT, its sales are so tiny? It is claiming not much more than $200,000 in sales last year, and that is before the auditors take away anything that is bogus. The candy store down the street from me does more business than that.
Even if Allied Signal or others thought DCHT's technology had some value, they would not invest a nickel in the company without audited statements.
"Did Dcht or someone on the inside there do you wrong or get the best of you somewhere along the line?"
I never heard of DCHT until Steve started spamming it all over the web. If you don't like me, blame him. |
