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: Mike M who wrote (4390)	5/11/2003 8:15:35 PM
From: DanZ	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 5582

lol I laughed at mad's post too. Logical analysis such as posting nearly ten year old 144 filings that have no bearing on anything. Logical posts that assert I threatened Floyd. lol How did I threaten him? It's more like he threatened me. Logical analysis like Floyd's barrage of worthless unrelated posts last week. Does he appear worried about something? Here's some factual and logical analysis. Notice how none of them respond to it directly? Sales growth 2000 to 2001: 48.6% Sales growth 2001 to 2002: 46.5% EPS 2002: $0.14 Revenue growth projection 2002 to 2003 (source Matrixx): 30% This projection was reaffirmed at the annual meeting a couple of weeks ago. EPS 2003E: $0.26 (source Matrixx expense guidance plugged into my spreadsheet) Growth in EPS based on the estimate: 86% We'll see what numbers Mr. Lavigne puts out. I don't think that they will be far from mine unless he decides to increase his expense projections above the company's guidance. You and your buddies are short a stock that: 1. Has two years of 40% plus revenue growth behind it and 30% plus revenue growth ahead of it. 2. Has one year of earnings behind it and another full year of earnings ahead of it. 3. Has three straight quarters of earnings behind it. 4. Has a small debt load that will be fully paid off in a few months. 5. Has plenty of cash and is cash flow positive, which means cash will continue increasing. 6. Is trading near a 52 week low on rising short interest, and at a multiple to sales well below the industry average. 7. Has one analyst just coming on board, and more to follow (my opinion). 8. Has increasing volume, which leads me to believe that a fund has already recognized the value of this company and started buying. 9. Has very experienced management in the area of OTC drugs. 10. Is proving their innovation by releasing new and novel products. 11. Increased their R&D budget to 6% of sales that will obviously lead to more new and novel products coming to market. What is your rationale for being short? I know. You hate Gum Tech. Well, jokers, Gum Tech is long gone. Now you're dealing with the list above. Get used to it. This stock is worth a lot more than 2.8 times sales given their growth. All you do is spew five to ten year old nonsense that has no relation to today, or more importantly, to the future. So, I ask the shorts again. What is your rationale for being short this stock? I'd really like to hear some serious answers. I like dim sum, and even made it myself a few times, but it doesn't have anything to do with the discussion here. Thanks, Dan