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 : Vasomedical Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Fred Levine who wrote (811)	12/30/1997 7:11:00 PM
From: TradeOfTheDay	Respond to of 1605

Fred, thank you for relaying the news of your phone call. It is nice to hear that the company sounds confident. Bev

To: Fred Levine who wrote (811)	12/30/1997 9:27:00 PM
From: DrJerry	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1605

FRED: I think you are underestimating the volume of patients per machine. Currently in NJ there are machines handling patients in 2 shifts/day thus allowing 8-10 patients at a time. Utilizing a 7 day work week for efficiency then each machine could handle approx. 80 patients/ year. A four bed unit could thus service approx. 300 patients/ year. With expected reimbursement rates of $5-6000/patient gross revenues would be 1.5- 1.8 million for such a unit. Overhead is considerably less than an average physician office more in the 30-40% range. Sooooo- if efficacy continues to be proven then the outlook for EECP is good. Don't sell your stock yet!

To: Fred Levine who wrote (811)	12/31/1997 12:37:00 AM
From: Don Walster	Respond to of 1605

I agree that Vaso will make it. I think it is getting some tough competition right now that will increase substantially later on. If it looks like a a winner, many others will make and market comparable equipment, maybe even better, and for less than Vaso. How long it will take for Vaso to score is the question. Considering its present lethargy I asked myself, are there other oportunities? I got out with a nice profit to buy 6 Israeli hi tech stocks that had gone into the tank because of the Asian Contagion. Time will tell whether I was right or wrong. So far, things look very promising. But either way, for the sake of all of you, I hope Vaso makes it big. Don

To: Fred Levine who wrote (811)	12/31/1997 11:22:00 AM
From: Don Walster	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1605

Since reference has been made to "Don" with regard to the accuracy of a comparison between Cardio and Vaso, which I did not intend to disclose, I think it is now only fair that the readers see the comparison so they can judge for themselves. It was sent to me by John Hutchins, Vice President of Cardiomedical, Sales and Marketing "We are in receipt of your December 8 letter as well as your December 23 Internet Communication. I must apologize for taking so long to respond to your initial fax but we have been traveling extenseively trying to stay abreast of the tremendous demand for our CardiAssist device. We are very pleased to have exceeded our third and fourth quarter objectives. The first quarter of 1998 also looks phenomenal. You asked several questions in your 12/8 fax that I would like to attempt to answer. I am sending a reference piece that thoroughly depicts the differences between our CardiAssist device and Vasomedical's Chinese device. The reference to an importer that I previously worked for is Vasomedical. Regarding our plans for an IPO, depending on the market, we hope to go public in the spring time frame (April or May) of 1998. We are currently working with several investment banking firms in order to raise the last $5,000,000 we require, via a private placement memorandum. Thanks for your interest in Cardiomedics. If you have additional question/requests don't hesitat to call or fax." "CARDIOMEDICS - VASOMEDICAL COMPARISON Place of manufacture Cardio - Irvine, CA Vaso - China Electrical requirements 1-20-amp regular outlet 1-15 & 1-20 amp special outlet Space requirements Minimal 10' x 10' room Medical grade components Yes Unknown Portable Yes No Number of components 1 4 P.C based Yes No Type of controls Touch screen/keyboard Manual knobs and buttons Type of circuit boards Computer wired/soldered Hand wired/soldered PATENT SAFETY FEATURES Emergency system power down Yes Patient "OFF" switch High tank pressure Yes No Low tank pressure Yes No High cuff pressure Yes No Low cuff pressure Yes No High heart rate Yes switches to 2:1 Low heart rate Yes shuts down No cuff inflation Yes No No cuff deflation Yes No Cuff pressure after PVC Normal 150% of normal Patien isolation circuit Yes No Ground fault protection Yes No Number of cuffs 2 or 3 3 Internal Strip chart recorder Yes No Computerized patient records Yes No Download patient to disk Yes No Customize software Yes No Modem ready Yes No Decibel noise lever Approximately 50 db Approximately 72 db Real time ECG, pressure trace Yes No Continuous Augmentation ratio Yes No" Please note that the latter part refers to PATENT SAFETY FEATURES which should represent an indisputable difference. References was made in the post to which I referred that some of the differences were questionable. I understand from Vaso that they can now put their equpment in an amubulance for emergency use, but this is not fully portable. There may also have been some recent minor catch-up changes, but the differences are overwhelming, especially those under patent. Natalie Carp from Vaso conceded to me that Cardio is, as she put it, cosmetically superior. This is a gross understatement if you happened to see the cumbersone Vaso equipment on TV. I would not have mentioned all this had there been no reference to me and information that I had emailed specifically stating that I used email to avoid posting this information. When the accuracey of the comparison was questioned I felt it my responsibility in fairness to both Cardio and Vaso, but more especially to the readers to make this information public. I trust that relevant information from any reliable source is always welcome on SI. Don Walster