PLC- Here is some more info. This was written by another investor so take it for what is worth. But it sounds promising.
My conversation with PLC IR:
by: HParch 13940 of 13947As promised, here it is, in a nut shell:
-He (Mr. Svikhart) hadnt heard of ESTI appearing on CNBC as it only happened just today.
-PLC has taken a policy of "understating with hope of overperforming". They are seriously concerned about any potential "hype", and don't want any part of it.
-PLC will answer every shareholder call; that is now their policy.
-Yes, the 21 investor (consolidated into 1) lawsuits have them "concerned" and they have to excercise caution in their public statements.
-When I asked him about why the company can't just post updated factual information, such as how many shipments they have made (or are making), in order to relieve the shareholders by letting them know that "good things" are happening, despite the recent (past 9 months or so), he said that if they did so, they would be bound to do so, forever after (I took this to imply that this could prove unduely disadvantageous in times when few shipments are made). In other words, because PLC hasnt been saying anything as of late, that doesnt necessarily mean that "nothing" has been happening. This is no the first time I have heard this policy being taken; good CFO's understand this.
-He did make a point to say that when they have news that is pertinent and credible, they will announce it ASAP; HCFA reibursement was indeed broken by them, for example, as he pointed out to me.
-In talking about ESTI/CGCP combined market cap(around $300m) vs PLC's ($100m), he seems to also feel, as I have expressed here many a time, that there seems to be an unjustified imbalance (my words, not his), and he said PLC's goal was to build solid sharholder value, based on performance, not spontaneous news announcements.
-I asked him if he could divulge any information regarding Q4 of last year, but, he declined, saying that it will all be in the report, due out, as of this point, Feb 23.
-When talking about communications with the street, he was very candid. He explained that this was quite dififcult, in that so many of the players who went public recently have lost such severe value, that the institutions wont appropriate enough media funding to even cover the sector; although, he said that PLC is on a campaign to gain their attention again as an audience, while also, trying to do more traditional PR through the medical industry (pamphlets, seminars, clinics, etc...).
-One point he made, which, will address the accustations of a certain poster here (BOOKER), is tht those shares that he bought back in September were made with his personal money, NOT loaned by the company or with some corporate incentive; he stated clearly that he bought this stock at a price that he felt was a true value.
-I wanted to ask more about the CGCP patent setlement, but, I totally forgot. Damn it. :-)
MY take:
When a company's stock is attacked the way PLC's was, management has got to take inventory and figure out what the best thing for the shareholders is. Mr. Svikhart and Mr. Dow feel strongly that factual communications on a regular basis will build shareholder confidence; but there is a fine line between communications and HYPE, which they seem to be very insistant on never crossing. I personally like this attitude, as it tends to give a stock more stability once it is trading solely on those facts as known.
Looks to me like its a waiting game; after talking to Mr. Svikhart, I feel that my investment has more stability and upside potential than the current price and the market sector indicates, because, IF the good things that I forsee (thanks PR) coming DO HAPPEN, they cannot be denied.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: Feb 9 1999 6:19PM EST as |
