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: DanZ who wrote (2734)	10/23/2000 12:49:52 AM
From: Mark Marcellus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5582

It doesn't matter if the money came from the financing activity. The investment that they made in the last two years already paid off in the form of a substantial joint venture with Swedish Match and enabled them to bring Zicam to market As I said to Mike, that is not a healthy way of looking at a development stage company. Yes, they've stayed above water by raising equity during the greatest bull market in history, but to call them cash flow positive is wrong, even if it is technically true. Cash burn is what you should be concerned with, as Auric (rather hysterically) keeps pointing out. BTW, they are lucky that we've had a great bull market because in a less friendly environment they would not have gotten a second chance after their previous failures. The fact of the matter is, "Auric" said "GUMM has not had postive cash flow for over 5 quarters, if ever". This is a false statement, as I proved with the data from Gum Tech's cash flow statements. Anyone with a brain understood that he was referring to cash flow from operations. Since you say you understood the difference, you were being either deliberately misleading or deliberately obtuse, IMO.