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.

Biotech / Medical : GUMM - Eliminate the Common Cold -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Carl R. who wrote (2191)	2/5/2000 1:25:00 PM
From: DanZ	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5582

Carl, Hank's criticism of the sample size is without merit because nobody knows what the sample size is. I view his criticism as simply trying to plant doubt in people's minds because he is short GUMM. He has a habit of trying to find something negative in everything whether anything negative even exists. You think that this is good; I think that it hurts his credibility. Hank never has anything good to say about Gum Tech and doesn't give the company credit where credit is due. I have a hard time taking anybody serious that characterizes Zicam as "Ziscam" or "snake oil", or somebody that refuses to acknowledge that expectations for future fundamentals move stock prices to a much greater extent than past history. People that are apparently experienced with statistics posted that a sample size of 100 is statistically significant in this case. Quigley's independent study on 100 subjects was published in the Annals of Internal Medicine. I don't think that their study would have been accepted for publication if the results weren't statistically significant. A recent news story medformation.com said that the study on Zicam was conducted at four locations. Estimates are that up to 70% of colds are caused by the rhinovirus, and it is already known that all the serotypes of the rhinovirus use the ICAM-1 to infect cells. Based on Zicam's theoretical mechanism of action, it would be effective on all serotypes of rhinovirus, but not on viruses that don't infect cells through ICAM-1. We won't know until the details of the study are released if they proved the mechanism. If they didn't prove the mechanism with the last study, I think that they will try to prove it in a future study. As for Hank's attitude, everybody deserves a second chance, and people have some control over how others perceive them. I hope that you feel better soon, and thanks for the prognosis of how Zicam is treating your cold. You're right that it won't work for every cold, and I also wonder what consumers will think if it doesn't help every time. I asked the company about this a while back and they told me that they haven't received any complaints in this regard. Dan

To: Carl R. who wrote (2191)	2/5/2000 10:07:00 PM
From: Mike M	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5582

Carl, while I agree that it serves no useful purpose to call anyone names on the threads, it is also true that Hank is unable to have an open mind about this company. This attitude is, no doubt, related to his current work which demands thorough analysis of critical medical research. But it is also related to his having chosen to short the stock back at 17. What Hank fails to realize is that the type of research he insists upon is simply not indicated for a "homeopathic" cold medication. The FDA does not require it and neither does the public. Neither will many of the doctors when and if the results are published by a respected medical journal. Though Hank refutes this, one publication already had agreed to publish and were it not for the incredible publicity, that milestone would have been satisfied this month. IMO, Hank made a big mistake by shorting this company. This goes a long way to explain why he dislikes the company so intensely. (I was short AMZN for a while and hated that company. I still believe that AMZN will ultimately fail but recognized that it wouldn't happen before I was severely financially injured. So I punted!). His short was, in my opinion, for all the wrong reasons. It is, after all, immaterial whether the "scientific community" en masse will embrace this or any other homeopathic remedy. (Homeopathy continues to gain recognition, perhaps best exemplified by Warner Lambert's acquisition of a homeopathic company!) What is critical to the success of the company is whether the public at large embraces the product. To date it is apparent that they do but only time will tell if demand will grow. I believe it will. This is just my opinion but I believe that the sales will be in the hundreds of millions in a few years. I believe this because the product is highly marketable, demand exists, the price is right and because it obviously works on some colds (and possibly even works on allergies). Interestingly, however, I do not believe that the long range success of the company hinges on Zicam. I have owned this company for one reason. Gary Kehoe. I think he has a genius which was clearly manifested by Zicam but that is only one small facet. Gary sold me a long time before Zicam that GUMM is a research company as well as a manufacturing company. They are in the business of developing "drug delivery systems". I believe that they will successfully develop any number of these "delivery" systems for Fortune 500 pharmaceutical companies in the years to come and will garner huge licensing fees. I also believe that they will successfully engage in developing and manufacturing a myriad of products, some gum and others not gum related, for large multinational companies like SWMAY, perhaps Colgate, P&G...etc. The patent and clinical results for Zicam, and the joint venture with SWMAY are just the first down payment for what I hope will someday be a billion dollar company. I realize that is a heck of a stretch for a company just able to manage $15M in sales this year. Sorry if my expectations sound outlandish. I know they do and many will reject them out of hand. That is fine with me. I am quite willing to stick with this company while it endeavors to grow its business. If I am wrong then I will recognize this in due time and take whatever appropriate action is necessary. Because my expectations of Gary are so high I was only mildly surprised when they announced the development of Zicam. I was not flabbergasted when he got the product in every major drug store and pharmacy in the country or when the AJIC agreed to publish. I was not surprised when he managed what I consider to be his greatest coup to date which is a 51-49 joint venture with SWMAY. I believe it is, in fact, this joint venture which is largely responsible for the powerful move in this stock. Getting back to Hank, I don't believe it is appropriate for any of us to get into a name calling frenzy. Hank is hurting as a result of his short position, and it is natural that he take issue with what he perceives as an invalid valuation. Those of us who have huge gains certainly have no basis for anger or frustration. I believe that nothing Hank, Wexler or anyone else says will have a long range impact on this company's ability to implement their business plan. I believe they are a debt free company and cash is not a problem. (I am saying that I believe that they have paid back every penny of their Citadel loan). Time will tell.