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: Ariella who wrote (117)	11/7/1998 11:43:00 AM
From: Don Walster	Respond to of 1386

Dear Ariella: Please include me in your group letter. I own 60,000 shares. Kindest regards, Don Walster (85)

To: Ariella who wrote (117)	11/7/1998 5:40:00 PM
From: Don Walster	Respond to of 1386

Dear Ariella: There has been a lot of speculation about the reason for the lack of Interest in Pharmos. It has been suggested that this may be due to a lack of communication and PR. Although this may well be a contributing factor, there is another reason for which I have not heard a satisfactory answer. I quote from a post that appeared on Yahoo from a reliable source, a person who goes by the name of fjallbacka who says that for "pars all is well as long as Pharmos is able to advance its science." pars all is well by: fjallbacka 2448 of 2495 As long as Pharmos is able to advance its science. We have been told that Pharmos has a limited amount of money, that will be depleted next year, unless certain things happen. We have also been told that recognizing this potential "burn out" in order to conserve money Pharmos has had to cut back on their research and development. Since fjallbacka says that "pars is well as long as Pharmos is able to advance its science" doesn't a cut back in R and D interfere with and put at risk that advancement? Most of what I read about Pharmos is posted by a highly sophisticated clique of people who realize the enormous potential of Pharmos. This I do not question. They make an enormous contribution. But the bottom line is that the average investor understands little of this highly technical information. What they understand and are interested in is earnings. I also think even a novice realizes the primary importance of R and D especially in an industry like this. I believe the admitted problem of limited capital, questionable earnings, and a cut back in R and D to conserve capital is the main cause of lack of interest in Pharmos, regardless of the attempted explanations. Incidentaly, one of the things I appreciate about this thread is the openness and candor of the contributors. The worst thing that can happen is for a thread to be dominated by a lot of cheerleaders of which we are not one. I am personally grateful to all who contribute. Kindest regard, Don

To: Ariella who wrote (117)	11/7/1998 8:34:00 PM
From: schadenfreude	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1386

>>How many of you realize that the $90K in revenues logged during the third-quarter would have been $180K if we had been able to show the actual unit sales instead of them being hidden under the drawdown from inventory? << Ariella, I'm sure this has been covered before, but what is the revenue potential of Lotemax and Alrex? What are the sizes of the markets these drugs address? What are the financial terms of the deal with B&L? I'm trying to figure out why I should be excited about $180K in revenues. Thanks

To: Ariella who wrote (117)	11/8/1998 9:21:00 AM
From: tom pope	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1386

RE drawdown from inventory - Ariella Sales out of inventory are recorded as sales as they occur, I believe.

To: Ariella who wrote (117)	11/8/1998 4:28:00 PM
From: crysball	Respond to of 1386

Dear Ariella, With Regard to your 'OPEN INVITATION', I accept your offer. My Pharmos holdings are currently 90,000+ shares [as previously stated my #1 holding]. On occasion, I've less than patient, however, I share your confidence in management, and believe our patience will be rewarded. You have invested more than money in PARS, with all the time and effort you devote to this thread. Your analysis is succinct, timely, and well thought out. All readers of this thread owe much to you. Best Regards, Neil