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: StockDung who wrote (2948)	12/31/2000 7:26:16 PM
From: Sir Auric Goldfinger	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 3392

Bennedict Winehouse at his finest, what scum: "spoke with Winehouse, who allegedly admitted to him that he eliberately had shorted the stock to drive the price down, said that he intended to continue, and advised Gurary to sell his shares because the price would drop to "a dollar" both sides of his mouth and every orofice.

To: StockDung who wrote (2948)	1/6/2001 7:54:41 PM
From: blebovits	Respond to of 3392

CYBR - CYBER-CARE INC (+2.70%) High: 4.125 Exchange: Nasdaq NM Delay: at least 15 minutes Last Price: 3.5625 at 16:00 EST Change: Up 0.09375 (+2.70%) High: 4.125 at 9:44 EST Low: 3.4375 at 9:30 EST Open: 3.4375 Previous Close: 3.46875 on 1/4 Volume: 874,900 30-Day Avg. Volume: 554,000 Shares Outstanding: 64,785,000 Market Cap.: 230,796,562 52-Week High: 40.00 52-Week Low: 1.93 Beta: 2.24 Yield: Nil P/E Ratio: Not Material EPS: -0.61

To: StockDung who wrote (2948)	1/28/2001 9:32:45 PM
From: afrayem onigwecher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3392

Modestly educated view on CALs: Our speculating on the course of these suit is frought with huge error margins because of the fluid dynamics of this type of litigation. It is best that we just let them take their course and accept the fact that they are something of a millstone around our collective necks in the interim. Some basic premises do apply, and I think they are these: 1) The firms that file these kinds of suits are usually involved in lots of other similar suits, and as to their caseload there are more dogs than racehorses. It is a mud-against-the-wall-see-what-sticks approach. 2) Lawsuits are driven by bad facts, good law or both. As to where CYBR stands measured against this, we have a general idea (not too bad?) but until they withstand the deposition and document discovery phase of this, it's just too hard to tell. Don't count a CYBR's dismissal motion being granted. Summary Judgment may or may not be a different story. 3) Like much else in life, lawsuits are a lot about leverage. Notwithstanding an assumed absence of damaging testimony/documents from CYBR, experienced plaintiffs' counsel will look to settle this suit (and perhaps hold out to get their price) at the juncture where they know it is CRITICAL for the company to get the suits behind them. There are lots of factors that create leverage, and imminent JVs and shareholder issues are certainly among them. 4) There is a lot of bluff in this game. Sooner or later the cards have to be played. It is WAY too soon for endgame here. I am encouraged by the fact that CYBR has apparently chosen to fight the suits. Plaintiff's counsel will have to work, and they will lose heart if their discovery is progressively coming up with nil. The better lawyers on the plaintiffs' litigation team will gradually drift away in this event. Count on it. 5)Strength is forged in adversity. CYBR has certainly had its share of it, and if they survive the rigors of the CALs, it will emerge stronger, wiser, and emboldened for the future. The most we can do about this is stay in their cheering section. My guess is that we are a couple years away from resolution unless this case, and the judge presiding over it, are on a rocket docket. As in all else, the watchword here is patience. --BP ragingbull.com