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 : CYBR CyberCare the new look of healthcare -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: peter michaelson who wrote (2205)	6/19/2000 1:15:00 PM
From: sommovigo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3392

Peter, The Fnord comment was tongue in cheek to be sure. I have seen the damage Floyd has done in the past and also have been somewhat privy to his investigative faults. The thing that has made me wonder the most about Floyd is why he spent so very much time "covering" CYBR on the SI page with not one mention of it on his web site. I have wondered the same thing about Stephan (Auric) - why did he spend so much time on the CYBR page dogging the stock that he was admittedly short on and not mention it on his own thread? As for my place of residence and a relationship with CYBR, not the case. I did, however, call the company last January to arrange for a shareholder demonstration at the GA Tech facility on January 13th. I met some of the people from Cybercare at that point - including both David Richey and Steven Ratzell, both of which seem to have left the company, and one of which seems to have been 'let go' as no resignation was tendered. I found CYBR by watching out for my dad's investment in MIOA - which had been literally touted to him almost 3 years ago. As I work from my home, I had more opportunity to watch the price of the stock and look for places for him to get out as he was at a loss. When the Cybercare acquisition happened and the patent came through, I told him to hold and started acquiring shares for myself. Whereas before CYBR I was looking for a place to get my father out of the investment, after CYBR I was looking to invest and hold for myself. As an amateur investor I was hurt badly by the plummet from 40 because of margin, but I was able to retain a decent amount of shares for the long-haul. I still plan on staying for the long haul as no one has yet showed me ample reason, fundamentally, that the company is a poor investment. Auric, some months back, called CYBR a "pumpandump scam" - with FDA approval of the technology, it would seem that the tech and the company are real and not just fronts to promote stock prices as Auric implied with his comment. Until such time as someone can give good, material, and fundamental reasons for leaving the stock - I still believe that it is a good investment. I am willing to learn, but I am not willing to be manipulated. I'm always on the lookout for both.