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 (3422)	12/7/2000 9:18:18 AM
From: Mark Marcellus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5582

Dan, you can make any company look good if you selectively post numbers. Here's a tip for future analysis. Companies which don't make money tend to have lower P/S and P/B ratios then companies which do, at least during rational market periods. How about doing a comparison of GUMM's profit margins to the overall total. That may put things in perspective. But, just out of curiousity, I decided to do a little stock screen over at MSN. They break down the sectors a little more narrowly than the broad category you gave, which makes for a better comparison. (I'm assuming that GUMM has no plans to manufacture biologically engineered gum, for example.) I chose the "Drug Related Products" category as the best match for GUMM. Companies included: Herbalife, NBTY, Twinlab, Carter-Wallace, etc. When I screened for companies which had greater P/S and P/B vs. companies which had lower P/S and P/B, the results were 17 companies which were cheaper by this measure and 4 companies which were more expensive. BTW, GUMM only beat one of the companies on profit margin. Of course, if you want to compare GUMM's P/S and P/B to Merck and Pfizer and conclude from the comparison that GUMM is cheap, be my guest. Just don't call it analysis.