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: out_of_the_loop who wrote (2052)	7/13/1999 4:01:00 PM
From: Mad2	Respond to of 10293

Howard My post that stated To believe that they are going to stroll into a market and steal market share from someone else while making money and not consuming huge amounts of cash and execute this reliably . was refering to Dan's reference to GUMM and being a 100mil company in the following Between Zicam, nicotine gum, and GumTech's other successful products, I am confident that they will book close to $100 million in sales in the year 2000 and over $100 million in 2001. If things work out that way, they could earn $4 to $5 per share, and today's $12 stock price will look very cheap. Given that Dan earlier expounded on GUMM magically selling 80mil of the smoking cesation gum and I offered a breif financial analysis I would say I'm the one focusing on the numbers, you and Dan aren't. Concerning fraud, everyone buys stocks with the expectation of a positive return on their investiment. Why doesn't it happen in all cases? Thats because things don't always go to plan due to either stupidity or due to fraud (to use blunt termnology). In the simpliest terms when examining failure in the light of a public shareholder a company either didn't know what they were doing (stupidity) or once they knew they didn't cut their losses and accuratly communicate with all classes of shareholders. What really happens is certian classes of shareholders have more information than other's and the failed gameplan isn't disclosed (sometimes its maintined) during a period when the knowledgeable group sells out and those who buy in at that point become defrauded.....thus fraud. Proving this in court is difficult. Howard I'm sure all on this thread are getting bored with our discussion. I'd be happy to continue over on the GUMM thread should you want to provide a detailed financial picture of how GUMM will grow and obtain financing that will support their current stock price. That's what this discussion comes down to. IMO GUMM will be lower in 6-9 months and I also believe that this ZICAM thing has more to do with creating the expectation of great things for GUMM, thus keeping their stock price up and I believe that when the euphoria is over and reality sets in certian shareholders and financal backers will have gotten out at a very opportune time. Will that be fraud if it occurs? Some will say so. This is the most likely outcome. If it doesn't I'll publically appologise to you and Dan. ZICAM is a interesting product but by no means is it a slam dunk from a consumer acceptance point or from a financial perspective. Accepting that it does do something and they are getting it into retailers, consumers still have to buy it, be satisfied with it and of course GUMM needs it to be a financial sucess. It also a seasonal product, which for a small company like GUMM can hurt. It does seem that Davidson through his control of Gel Tech Inc. (40% owner of Gel Tech LLC) will be the real benificiary of these efforts. While I'm not knowledgable of the intimate details of who gets what it's a element of GUMM that should be investigated by anyone investing long. Mad2