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.

Non-Tech : ZOLT -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mike M who wrote (752)	7/12/1998 11:07:00 PM
From: Dave Mansfield	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 970

Mike, thanks for reposting Zsolt's response to your question. Again, there are no guarantees that they will be able to lower the cost of CF to $5 per pound and that they will develop substantial new markets for its use, but then that is part of the reason why it's trading at $20. If the answers to the above were known, it would be trading at $100+ if it were positive and probably around $10 if it were negative. Only time will tell, short term investors be damned. Dave

To: Mike M who wrote (752)	7/12/1998 11:41:00 PM
From: Paul Kelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 970

Actually Mike, the expert to whom you referred described himself as a freak. I for one am taking him at his word and will continue to leave the poor fellow alone. Thanks for bringing Zsolt's thoughts and comments to the thread. For those truly interested in free cash flow may I suggest Coca Cola Enterprises for a change. Paul

To: Mike M who wrote (752)	7/13/1998 9:29:00 AM
From: RBlatch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 970

Dear Mike - The letter from Zsolt Rumy sounds exactly like what I would say to a shareholder who was providing me with a "cash cow" to milk. What makes you think that he is just not protecting an entity (the company) that he is making tons of money from. If someone asked you an opinion on whoever you work for , and you knew a negative opinion would affect your personal income, what would your likely response be? This is not to say that his response is untrue. This is to only say I would not accept it without prejudice. The proof is in the bottom line, and his bottom line is getting weaker and weaker. So are his hollow promises which must continually be extended further out into the future with each passing day. I wish success to all involved in their investments. I am cautiously awaiting some positive movement in the direction of product and earnings. Cordially, RBlatch

To: Mike M who wrote (752)	7/13/1998 2:31:00 PM
From: aatkinson	Respond to of 970

Mike: I appreciate your ability to garner responses directly from Mr. Rumy, unfortunately he didn't answer all of what I thought were very clearly stated questions. First of all, after arguing the point ("as wrong as can be"), he re-states the company's strategy as I basically presented it: Lowering customer's cost (his price) to drive up applicability and at the same time increase capacity to meet the new demand -- which would cause sales,and therefore profits, to soar. No argument from me. During the early P.R. campaign, the stated cost (price) goal was $5/pound. I've seen articles in the past which claim even that's too high to bring on many of the targeted applications. Mr. Rumy failed to mention the status of price/pound. I think that if were even close to $5/# with consistent production, we would have had an answer. He didn't answer the question regarding his capacity goal and the status. He had an opportunity here to clear up the suspected production problems, and the associated technology. He did mention that he has lost sales over the last three quarters; it's sure fortunate we have Asia to blame. If you take a look at some of the electronics companies like Phillips, to see if their sales are appreciably down. They're not. I've never professed to be a 10K expert; I just think most of the information provided in the 10K is fairly objective, and that you can learn a lot about the company by analyzing the data, especially when compared to competitors. I also think that Mr. Rumy is a very smart fellow, who has his personal fortune tied up in this company. He's right about current stockholders concentrating on the current status - his inability to meet his low-cost fabrication goals, his problems bringing on capacity, his inability to sell current production, and his inability thus-far to create new applications. With this status, he recommends enthusiasm. Unless he starts a PR campaign detailing major breakthroughs, I still think the stock will fall to the mid-teens. Thanks anyway for trying to get him to give specifics, too bad he didn't or couldn't. regards