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 : Elan Corporation, plc (ELN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Metcalf who wrote (1518)	2/5/2002 1:57:21 AM
From: James C. Mc Gowan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10345

John, Geaney was perturbed with David Maris, for obvious reasons, historical, but also, as Maris wanted to drive another nail in on the accounting issues. Funny thing, actually made me laugh out loud: Maris got his turn on call-in, started by saying he had a number of questions, then launched into the first, on accounting. Just as he finished reciting the first question, the line went dead. HA! Geaney right away asked for the next caller, and the q+a went forward. Later, Maris got thru again and started by repeating his earlier question, and Geaney cut him off, saying, 'we already heard the question, David' in a rather downbeat tone. He answered the question and more questions followed, each one from Maris in sort of a Lt. Columbo kind of patter. This guy is a real piece of work. But Geaney and others answered his questions. There was some talking over each other, but not inappropriate, angry. Maybe a combination of time lag in voice transmission, and general dislike for Maris, who was sort of gloating. I didn't hear anything that would indicate Elanites lost their composure, but their tone of voice with Maris betrayed thier enmity for him. I didn't hear all the Q+A, as I had to focus on the share price at open, and the cc continued, I believe, for almost 2 hours total, and callers were invited to continue to call in to discuss, after the web cc sign off. I did note, as has been indicated here by others, that Elanites sort of off-handedly mentioned some items that it did not seem they were going to volunteer, e.g. the Swiss Alzheimer's patient problem, so one was left to wonder what else they might be withholding. It's a trust thing, you know. They are presenting as if they are 'coming clean' and addressing all the perceived/real negatives going forward, but they really aren't laying it all out there, unless they are specifically prompted. Then it's like, oh yeah, that's a problem. I read that piece that was put out Friday and posted here/Yahoo ELN thread. It seemed to address the issues of concern and take a proactive stance toward defending Elan's merits,while clarifying the perceived negatives the WSJ put out there. Then, today, there was more that had not been touched, that came out, one was left with the feeling that these Elanites have a lot of skeletons, and they would like to let them out slowly. Just my feel re: contrast btw Friday response and cc content all IMHO. Picked up a few 04 Leaps today; somebody stop me,ggg James