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 : Biotime-Nasdaq's best kept secret? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim Roof who wrote (885)	4/30/1998 1:55:00 AM
From: CatLady	Respond to of 1432

"He has changed from sell to sell short. Frankly, what's the difference? Buy/strong buy. I have never been able to buy strong. My broker just lets me buy. Next time I will place my order for a strong buy instead. " Just don't place a short sell order when you only meant to sell. The report on his web site makes what seems to be a good case for BTIM being overvalued. Prior to today, stock was holding above support level of 11. That was broken quite decisively. We'll see where the next support level is.

To: Jim Roof who wrote (885)	4/30/1998 7:00:00 AM
From: Angel D	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1432

Jim, I don't know how much credibility can be placed on trading records for yesterday. For example, the internet quote service I normally use was showing Tuesday's figures all day. It was noon before I even realized something was up. About an hour before the close, I decided this was a good buy opportunity, so I called my broker to pick up a couple of hundred more long shares. This a national discount brokerage. His screen showed a trading range of 11+ and zero volume. He was somewhat dismayed by my order at 9 3/4, but placed it and it filled within minutes. He said he had never seen that before. It must have had something to do with the listing change. Also, when I contacted the company, their position was that they do not respond to these bogus press releases, as it might only serve to lend them credibility. Dr. Segall is in Japan and didn't even know about this through most of the trading day. (He was, by the way, in a very good mood up until now.) Last, while it seems that the Naz and SEC let this shortselling clown get away with his antics, what really bothers me is that the WSJ lets a staff "reporter" publish this story, although it is quite obvious that it was dictated to him by a known shortseller. The WSJ is generally know for publishing "news". Publishing this article put them in a class with the supermarket rag sheets. I think some of us ought to contact the WSJ and let them know how we feel about "yellow journalism" and their lack of standards. By the way, there is no doubt whatsoever that this was timed to offset the company's great news about trading on the big Naz. Best regards, AD

To: Jim Roof who wrote (885)	4/30/1998 11:09:00 PM
From: Wai-Shan Lam	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1432

i talked to Biotime investor relations just now - Victoria was the person i talked to. she said they're not preparing to respond to arsenio's comments b/c it's false and without basis, and that he's made the same false claims a few months ago already. she said it can't be a coincidence that arsenio is releasing their sell comments again just as Biotime is releasing their clinical results. also she said the statistic test they conducted according to what FDA wanted was only intended to show whether Hextend was any different from the other 2 products, not whether it's better. so the test being statistically insignificant is not saying that Hextend doesn't offer more advantage over the other 2 existing products. i asked Victoria what she thought the main points for Hextend's advantage - she said the fact that Hextend contains a buffer which makes the PH more constant, and electrolytes, and also the fact that it doesn't interfere with clotting as much all make Hextend a better product. she also pointed using plasma expander avoids hepatitis C infection. she said Biotime never made any official sales projection and she had no idea where the $750 million # came from. they have internal projection that's not made public. the point that was very vague is the $100 price tag - she said Abbott can charge whatever they think it's the fair price for a superior product. so $100 is not a false #. she said if the market is limited to the existing $30 million then Abbott wouldn't have bothered signing a deal with Biotime. if what they're trying to do is not just to capture part of the $30 million market but to expand the market and take it to the next level...