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 : AFFYMETRIX (AFFX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Richard Haugland who wrote (641)	3/12/1998 6:19:00 PM
From: TEColeman	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1728

I would think this guy could get in trouble for saying this. Assuming he did work for AFFX, this is akin to insider information (he could potentially short the stock with this info) Another possibility is that this person never worked for AFFX and is planning on shorting the stock. I suggest we find out if this information is accurate. Anyone have the IR # at AFFX? TEC

To: Richard Haugland who wrote (641)	3/13/1998 12:14:00 AM
From: Richard Haugland	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1728

Response posted on Yahoo from a "current AFFX employee" to ExAFFXer Well, there's nothing like a disgruntled ex-employee posting anonymously to cause a panic... NOT. It's good to see that few people take him seriously. In any case, it seems appropriate, as a current employee, to make some general remarks: Any sequencing or genotyping technology can be used incompetently. They all have complexities and caveats, and if you are sloppy enough, you can get results as bad as you want. You could easily get "50%" accuracy, or lower, with regular dideoxy sequencing if you perform and interpret the experiment in a particularly unflattering way. Unqualified numbers like that mean absolutely nothing. Furthermore, GeneChip is more than just one technology and one assay. Based on exAFFXers post, it is impossible to tell what particular assay he was evaluating. Was it a product? Was it some experimental chip being worked with internally? And how was the data being interpreted? Most sequencing technologies involve selective use of data - for example, on a sequencing gel, you pick a quality cutoff past which you simply throw the data away. By changing that cutoff, you can report pretty much any accuracy you want. 99.9%? No problem. 50%? Sure, you can get that, too. The anonymity and vagueness of exAFFXer's post suggests a hoax, but even so, when interpreting accuracy measurements for any technology, it pays to look beneath the surface and ask hard questions, because the real story is never simple, and can rarely be captured by a single number. IMO, it is certainly inappropriate for ExAFFXer to comment anonymously on confidential information of AFFX, whether true or not, and almost certainly a breach of contract of his previous employment agreement with AFFX, which almost certainly would have the confidentiality terms not expiring for several years after his employment terminated (if ever). Disparagement of AFFX could be a violation for which he could be sued if the person could be identified, particularly since the person is reported to now work for another company in a similar area. IMO, the comments of the current employee of AFFX may also be a violation of confidentiality terms of his employment contract. That is certainly insider information too and was not accompanied by SEC-type warnings or sanctioned by the company. Of course, between these two extremes any of us can hear whatever we want to hear. Disclaimer: I am currently not a holder of AFFX, having sold into the rise the other day but am waiting to go back in. Obviously, I could benefit by the stock's price retreating further but I posted the original remarks of ExAFFXer for people who may not read Yahoo.