Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Non-Tech : Bill Wexler's Dog Pound -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mad2 who wrote (2050)	7/13/1999 2:25:00 PM
From: out_of_the_loop	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10293

Well, Mad2, if can change the definitions of "fraud" and "criminal" or "scam" to mean "overvalued", then the rest of us who use conventional English language will generally not understand your meaning or intent. That's why words have definitions. LOL. What definitions do courts use? One of the reasons we have laws against libel and slander is so people will use judgement and restraint in most of their social intercourse. If one advertises a short position in a stock and then calls the operatives any of the above three words, then intent seems pretty clear because we all invest to make money. I think that Dan's style of posting is most effective because it concentrates on facts and numbers and does not use libelous verbiage and does not show malintent because of monetary incentive. Your arguments are way too general and often do not apply. I have not seen any figures presented here to substantiate your conclusion of "optimistic to say the least". You seem to have no idea how much money or time is required to produce Zicam because you have not quantified your statement - you let it stand alone for what it is worth. Specifically, are you saying they cannot produce it, they cannot distribute it, or they cannot pay for the raw materials? How do you even know how much they have in terms of raw materials, how much can be made per day, etc.? Anyway, I am outta' here and you all can just libel and/or misinform away. I think the facts have been presented and if any REAL information about Zicam is of interest to anyone, I would prefer to have it recorded on the GUMM thread. Best Regards, Howard

To: Mad2 who wrote (2050)	7/13/1999 2:57:00 PM
From: DanZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10293

Mad2, There's no doubt that GumTech will need capital to grow from ~8 million in sales to ~100 million in sales. What company wouldn't? Cash can be generated internally from operations or externally through loans, private debt, or equity. I have no doubt that Zicam will generate at least some of the cash that the company needs to grow. They already have all the capital improvements in place to make approximately $100 million in gum. Therefore, I don't think they will require much in the way of fixed assets. Cash will be needed to support growing operations for the purchase of raw materials and labor, but even if they borrow to support their growth, what's your point? I seriously doubt if financing will be an impediment to GumTech's growth. Money is available as we saw with the Citadel financing. I have no doubt that Citadel will make plenty of money on their recent deal with GumTech. What's to stop them from lending more if GumTech needs it? Finally, if GumTech is growing so fast that cash flow becomes a problem, I think GUMM shareholders will be very happy with the share price. Last, I emphatically disagree with your revised definitions of fraud and scam. Fraud has a very specific legal connotation and involves intentional deception. Scam generally means the intent to commit fraud. Neither of these terms even remotely describe GumTech, it's Officers, Directors, products, or anything to do with the companies operations. Of course sometimes things don't go as planned, but that does not mean it was a scam. IBM lost the operating system war with Microsoft. Are they a scam too?