SI
SI
discoversearch

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 (3809)3/19/2001 8:24:36 AM
From: Mark Marcellus  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 5582
 
The revenue and expenses of publicly traded companies must be reported to Shareholders regardless of whether they come from joint ventures or direct sales of the company's products. Gum Tech reports the results of their Gel Tech joint venture in just as great of detail as sales of their own gum products. Who are you kidding, Mark?

Who are you kidding? Are you saying that we'll see separate audited financials (esp. balance sheets) from the GelTech and Swedish Match JV's? Great news if true, but somehow I doubt it. I know you don't care too much for balance sheets Dan, but some of us find them quite interesting.

Gary is important to the Swedish Match joint venture

Does this mean the Swedish Match deal goes to Wrigley? Or is that what they mean by the "special consulting" arrangement.

Yeah, I'm sure that a conservative company with a high regard for their reputation like WWY wants to piss away $2 million on some POS scam stock

I'm glad to hear that the company gets the money, but as to why Wrigley would do this, there are many possibilities. One possibility is that their team of homeopathic medicine experts decided that Zicam is the greatest discovery since penicillin and they just had to put some money on it. Another possibility is that GumTech wanted more than than $25 million and Wrigley did a hedged stock deal which results in $2 million going to GumTech at virtually no cost to Wrigley. Perhaps the SEC filings will shed some light on this.