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.

Technology Stocks : Identix (IDNX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Page who wrote (5866)	12/19/1997 7:18:00 PM
From: Buck	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26039

Page, The reserves may not make it, but The company has been reserving money off the bottom line for the lawsuit and that will no longer be needed. In short, whatever their earnings are, they will be up a couple of pennies because the lawsuit was settled. A couple of pennies makes a drastic difference on the P.E. Also, many investors shy away from companies with lawsuits hanging over them.

To: Page who wrote (5866)	12/21/1997 11:20:00 PM
From: David	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26039

Thoughts on IDX lawsuit settling . . . I think we had a hint of what was to come here when Fowler indicated he thought the set aside would cover all anticipated legal expenses. You can never be that sure unless something is already in the works. And it's easier to understand the insurance companies attempting to cancel the policy last year . . . they could see this coming. We may never find out what the total amount was. But I predict it covered Lerach's legal fees and left a token amount left over for the client. As to the effect on the stock, we saw it wasn't immediately dramatic. It's just one less worry for the analysts, and a slight weight lifted off the bottom line in the next quarterly reports. We'll see dramatic movement in the stock when there is dramatic news, something much bigger than this. It's more interesting to speculate why Fowler settled when he promised not to. Either (a) Lerach had something or (b) he didn't, but Fowler wants a clean slate for the eventual sake of the share price. I don't think Lerach had very much. David Sorry for the untimely remarks, but I was away.