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 (4272)	3/5/2003 11:21:50 AM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 5582

DAN QUIT BEING A MORON:The notice shall be signed by the person for whose account the securities are to be sold. At least one copy of the notice shall be manually signed. Any copies not manually signed shall bear typed or printed signatures ATTENTION: Intentional misstatements or omission of facts constitute Federal Criminal Violations (See 18 U.S.C. 1001)

To: DanZ who wrote (4272)	3/5/2003 11:25:43 AM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 5582

"It wouldn't matter if Dick had an account at Sovereign anyway" BECAUSE YOU HAD CONFIRMED FROM HIM THAT HE SAID HE NEVER HAD AN ACCOUNT AT SOVEREIGN. YOU WOULD THINK THAT DICK WITH HIS REPUTATION ON THE LINE WOULD WANT TO CLEAR THIS MISUNDERSTANDING UP AND CLEAR HIS GOOD NAME. ESPECIALLY IF MAFIA CONTROLLED BOILER ROOM WAS FILING 144'S WITHOUT HIS KNOWLEDGE. LETS NOT FORGET MERRIL LYNCH AS WELL. WHAT WAS MERRILL LYNCH DOING FILING 144'S WITHOUT DICKS KNOWLEDGE? IMAGING THAT DAN, TWO BROKERAGES FILING 144'S WHERE DICK HAS TOLD YOU HE DID NOT HAVE ACCOUNTS. AND DAN, IN ORDER FOR A 144 TO BE FILED A BROKERAGE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE AN ACCOUNT IN THAT PERSONS NAME AS WELL AS PHYSICAL DELIVERY OF THE RESTRICTED STOCK WHAT ARE THE CHANCES OF THAT? BUYER BEWARE!!

To: DanZ who wrote (4272)	3/5/2003 6:18:45 PM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 5582

Schering-Plough Reduces Profit Forecast for 2003 (Update3) By Deborah Stern Kenilworth, New Jersey, March 5 (Bloomberg) -- Schering- Plough Corp., whose marketing practices are under government investigation, cut its forecast for 2003 profit as generic competition erodes sales of its Claritin allergy drug. Investors have speculated that Schering-Plough would lower its forecast as the company struggled with lower sales of Claritin, once its top-selling product. The drugmaker in December lost exclusive rights to Claritin, which generated almost a third of Schering-Plough's revenue in 2001. ``I'm dumbstruck that any company can keep shooting itself in the foot like this,'' said David Katz, chief investment officer for Matrix Asset Advisors Inc., which holds about 320,000 Schering- Plough shares. ``This is a continuation from a company that has been an absolute disaster in dealing with the investment community.'' Schering-Plough expects 2003 net income of 75 cents to 85 cents a share, below a forecast of $1 to $1.15 a share that the company made in October. The company today also said first-quarter profit will be about 10 cents a share, below the 25-cent average estimate of analysts surveyed by Thomson First Call. Shares of the Kenilworth, New Jersey-based company fell 53 cents, or 3.1 percent, to $16.60 as of 4:07 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. The stock has lost more than 52 percent of its value in the past 12 months. Chief Executive Officer Richard Kogan said he will retire by next month as the company faces government probes into its research and marketing practices and tries to fix production flaws. Schering-Plough last week said fourth-quarter and 2002 earnings were less than it had announced because it had added $150 million to its legal reserves. Manufacturing problems at the company delayed by 10 months the introduction of Claritin's successor, Clarinex, and forced the company to pay a record $500 million fine to settle regulators' complaints about the flaws.