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 : Chromatics Color Sciences International. Inc; CCSI -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JanyBlueEyes who wrote (1905)	4/30/1998 1:42:00 PM
From: David S.	Respond to of 5736

Size of what the potential market is different than what the market has historically been. The 6 vs. 15 million heel stick numbers used by sprx and ccsi as a historical number is very interesting. Whether the number of bilirubin checks expands to 20 million per year or 42 zillion per year once non-invasive methods take hold is something that can be discussed, but I just kinda wonder why a company would create such large expectations with that 15 million number. If the actual number is less, then that could create a severe disappointment in the stock. If ccsi had the same market cap as sprx, ccsi would trade below $5.

To: JanyBlueEyes who wrote (1905)	4/30/1998 1:48:00 PM
From: David S.	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 5736

In the 10-K for ccsi, it mentions that Ms. Macfarland has an office in her house for doing....work for the company. I am aware that people can have home offices and take a tax deduction. What I found hysterical is that she is getting paid by ccsi for the home office. I guess if she can get away with it, fine. Maybe since Skip Davidson claims to have spent 13 hours a day for the last millenium working on ccsi, the company will pay him for space in his house, too. Skip, if I were you, I'd ask Darby - you never know, she might agree to it. Wonder if Arthur Anderson would have anything to say about that rental situation? Jane, don't be mad at me, I am just having fun. and, Shammymoo, Seaworld is suing you over using a trademarked name.

To: JanyBlueEyes who wrote (1905)	4/30/1998 5:48:00 PM
From: waverider	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5736

A question about the little heel test on infants. They test for more than just for jaundice with that procedure don't they? I'm thinking here that the test will continue and an estimated income level to CCSI based on the heel test doesn't take that into consideration, right? For those with more knowledge, why would they use CCSI's product if they have to do the blood test anyway for other conditions? Could running the lab work on the blood be more cost effective? Sorry if I don't sound like I know what I'm talking about...because I don't. <H>