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 : Pharmos (PARS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: yosi s who wrote (65)	11/3/1998 11:14:00 PM
From: Dr. John M. de Castro	Respond to of 1386

I find this debate over PARS PR interesting. I have criticized their PR efforts in the past. However, I found todays release and the subsequent conference call as most appropriate and professional. The news release was IMHO right on the money of being appropriately informative and explanatory without the hype. The conference call was open and honest. I really appreciated the CFO admitting that they were a little disappointed in the Lotemax and Alrex sales. This sort of candor goes a long way in building investor confidence. I'd be willing to bet that the criticisms I've seen posted today would not have been said had the stock gone up. IMHO this is simply an expression of frustration on the part of investors who want to see a higher valuation for PARS. My read on todays trading was that it was a classic "sell on the news" pattern that for the long term is meaningless. I won't project the stock price fluctuation over the next day or week or even month. But, I've bet a considerable amount of money on the fact that I think that I can project the stock value two years from now and I expect to have a major grin on my face. John de C

To: yosi s who wrote (65)	11/4/1998 4:26:00 AM
From: Richard Huth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1386

Yosi, as excellent your idea might sound, but I doubt that it will have any benefit. These funds are managing big money, so it is important for them to get in and out quickly - without destroying the prices. Given the actual valuation of PARS no big investor would like to jump in, in fear of sitting in a money trap. But there is an exception to every rule, perhaps it will work. Better PR or not? I have the feeling we are loosing ground on this discussion. Reading the posts it sounds to me that we have an either or situation. Ariella, Omer, NI you all are more than right in what you are saying about that subject. Mgt. is doing a good job in bringing products to market, in concentrating on the deals (and not on rumors), in keeping cost down (it is our money that they save) and not becoming a company, that is just producing hot air for a short term recovery of stock prices. But in opposition to you I think that PARS could do a better PR job. And here David is right. Doing a better PR does not mean telling a lie, nor does it mean telling a big elephant where only a mouse is, nor dressing old news in new clothes. But there is a way between both lines - doing not such a good PR and creating a hype. NI et al are giving the right hint, when demanding Mgt. should concentrate of getting a good deal for HU211 aboard and not loosing credibility to big pharma by making "no news" to "big news". But share price is important. A stock that is in an downward trend for four month now and a company that is not able to attract investors does not look good. It sends a signal that the market does not trust the story. And in opposition to some I do not see the financial situation as bright. PARS is running out of money, and this is kind of a strait-jacket. Till now we have no idea when we see the first approval in Europe. Till now BOL and PARS have not been able to announce the co-marketing partner. Mgt. warned for continuing slow sales in Q4. So we have to be careful in saying PARS has no liquidity problems. Actually they have. And in this situation it does make a difference, if the stock stands at $3 or §1.4. PARS has the ability to sell shares to get some needed money. And they should get as much money as possible. This needs a higher valuation. So when David is asking for a better PR (perhaps sometimes in a to harsh way), I have the feeling it is not because he feels disappointed and is therefor looking for revenge. Ariella, Omer, you know the story of PARS better than most other do. So for you everything might look ok. But to new investors the story has to be told. Not between the lines, but in big letters. And for somebody not so involved in PARS reading the story becomes difficult. We know the advantages of concentrating on improved me-too products (less risk, less development costs, safer revenues). But investors do not see this. In biotech a lot of investors are used to look an exciting, new and market dominating products. And even with Hu211, things could have been told in a different manner, without making a hype story out of it. So why not take both, a better PR where possible, but still staying the company we invested in. Would this be impossible? Sorry for becoming that long Best regards, Richard

To: yosi s who wrote (65)	11/4/1998 4:53:00 AM
From: Omer Shvili	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1386

Yosi, That's Ruder Finn's job, and from what I understand they're quite good at it. I understand that PARS will be meeting with such fund managers in the coming weeks. We shouldn't try to contact these funds, and let PARS do its job (unless one of these guys is your college buddy, and he'll actually check into what you tell him). PARS' main reason for hiring Ruder Finn was to get access to institutional investors (like the ones you mentioned), and not to write nice and fancy press releases. I understand Ruder Finn will arrange such meetings, and so eventually these guys will know about PARS. Even if they won't buy shares, they'll put PARS on their radar screen which is quite fine. Once HU211 partner is announced, many of them will rush in as they'll already know the story. Omer