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 : Techniclone (TCLN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dave Belz who wrote (924)	12/22/1997 1:51:00 PM
From: Jim Baker	Respond to of 3702

Dave rings the bell! He is the first to notice that I have not had much to say, pro or con, regarding management! All others here have resorted to putting words in my mouth. They have attributed statements to me that I never made. All others have concluded that you are either on their side, agree with them, think like them, or you are foolish, evil, or worse. Their fanaticism is so strong that they see things that are not there. More to come.

To: Dave Belz who wrote (924)	12/23/1997 11:00:00 AM
From: Jim Baker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3702

Dave -- I guess I am an agnostic when it comes to this management. Is it good or is it bad or is it average? Well, at some point in the future, we'll really know. Until then, I couldn't make much of a case either way since I don't work for the company. How would I know how well each member is doing his/her job? But I have heard both sides of the outsider's debate, so here is my opinion. Management thinks it has worked hard and done some good work. Management also understands it needs some help, and this year's three key hires have upgraded the skill set in three important areas. Management also makes excuses. The excuses are somewhat valid since not everything is under the control of the management of any company. My opinion: this is decidedly not the A-Team, but it is also not the worst team I have ever seen, especially in biotech. A few of the more active shareholders have also been heard from (ad nauseum I might add). They were upset about a stacked Board, suspect loans to insiders, and the hiring of not one but two investor relations "managers" with limited experience and effectiveness. My opinion: these shareholders have some legitimate complaints but have lost their sense of perspective. They have pushed these issues too hard, and they now act and sound like adolescents who are never happy and blame everything on their very uncool parents. I think that when the history of Lon Stone is written, it will read a whole lot different than what is currently being posted on the internet. Think about it from the point of view a long-term holder of TCLN stock (shero??). They paid pennies for their shares. Few penny stocks from 15 years ago have survived to today and are worth serious money today (other than a few shells that were merged into totally different companies). Even at today's depressed stock price an investor in TCLN 15 years ago has earned a good return on his/her money. Stone kept the company out of bankruptcy, and along the way bagged some very valuable technologies. That's right, it was under his watch that LYMÿand TNT came into the picture for the first time, so he gets the credit. All in all, not a track record he has to be ashamed of. Even an intermediate-term investor (davis??) has earned a very attractive return. A spectacular return, had these investors bailed out at 6 or 7 (as several did) a few months ago or two years ago. Their failure to do so can't be blamed on Lon. Of course, the biggest payoff will go to the new CEO. This lucky bozo will walk in on a company that (after 15 years under the supposedly ruinous care of Lon and Bix and Rudy) has: A reasonable cap structure (30 or 40 million shares). An enviable patent estate (to quote davis). Trials that are about to launch or relaunch, and may not be far from approval (to quote davis). Licensing and development and financing deals that may be about to close (to quote management). A number of very high-quality partnerships around the world (stated fact). I do NOT think you'll hear much bad-mouthing about Lon and Bix and Rudy from the new CEO! At the urging of a few active shareholders, he will be handed a potential $100 million windfall. For doing nothing but walking in the door. Way to go shareholders! I suspect this management has done some really great things over the past 15 years, and some really dumb things, making it about average, especially in this particular industry (biotech). Is the entire issue just about the management? From the above discussion, you might begin to understand why I think many of the shareholders are just adolescents -- self-absorbed, unaware, inexperienced, and big-mouthed. They find it easier to play the blame game (as long as the blame is on someone else) than to undertake any type of independent research and thought. They certainly haven't lifted a finger to help the stock. I have seen shareholders who move a stock. I have seen what they do. This crew went off in a different direction. These shareholders are now full-blown self-righteous. Go back through their posts. They only complain and drive the stock down. They have done nothing to make me wealthy. Only the new CEO. I guess my answer to your question is: At this point in time I would trade-in both the management and the activist shareholders. This company and its stock need a clean start. Happy holidays!