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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Nuvo Research Inc -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: axial who wrote (13191)	12/12/2003 7:38:59 AM
From: Mark Bartlett	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14101

Jim, Like most things, there is some truth interwoven among your comments. However, as far as WF10 goes, the study seems to have ended over 2 years ago, and still today we have no PIII results. That is just NOT acceptable. As far as her raise goes and what is "average", and her not getting a raise for a few years -- that's the real world. I went for a 10-year period (not even the COL) without a raise and when I finally got one it was the COL from the previous year -- 3%. Would living on 250,000 for another year or two have killed her. Hell -- if Pennsaid gets approved in the US and if the WF10 results are ever published, she can have 3 million a year, for all I care. So, for retail investors like me, and DMX has historically been a retail "average person's stock" a 50,000 dollar raise, at a time when my investment has tanked, does not sit well. The optics are bad to say the least. I have been a supporter of REK for many years, but being a CEO is about judgement -- and what I saw there was not good judgement -- and I have to ask myself how much of that type of judgement has pervaded other DMX issues/decisions. Have a good day. MB

To: axial who wrote (13191)	12/12/2003 1:28:39 PM
From: wilyolvet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14101

while there is no disputing that rebecca has done some things right, there is also no disputing that there have been a myriad of mistakes punctuated by the fact that the share price is trading at 60% discount to the share price that wood gundy put $30 million into the coffers at dmx to fund wf10 many years ago jim....you constantly defend rebecca and while you admit that she has made some errors, you continue to insist that she is not really at fault and should be given more time to make things right...i respect everyone's opinion, so lets debate the following questions: whose fault is it that the street despises dmx? whose fault is it that nobody trusts rebecca? whose fault is it that dmx has teetered on the verge of bankruptcy for the last couple of years while partaking in very questionable financing arrangements? whose fault is it that wf10 has languished for two years when wood gundy put up the money years ago to see it through (rebecca must certainly been behind the choice of the $30 million figure that was raised) whose fault is it that so many promises have been broken and deadlines have been missed? when do the excuses simply ring out as excuses? when does a person become accountable? when is it time for the owners of the company to take action? when is it time to acknowledge that the investors have made a mistake in backing an insolvency lawyer as a ceo instead of an experienced industry person? what makes you think that the successes could not have been matched or exceeded (perhaps by a vast margin) by others? let's try to have a civil and intelligent discussion about some of the issues