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.

Technology Stocks : Xenolix Technologies (XTCI) 'Ecstasy'(Formerly MGAU) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Claude Cormier who wrote (2905)	2/18/1999 7:45:00 AM
From: Richard Mazzarella	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5143

Claude, <<Do you have a few names ?>> No I don't, but I can understand the possible need for secrecy. I worked for years in R&D and we used confidentially agreements with vendors and customers all the time, most large companies do. Some technology can be patented, but sometimes secrecy is the best policy, like Coke's secret syrup. Patenting can also be very expensive and one always seems to find a “better way” just about the time the patent issues. Patents disclose and teach, their purpose. The reward to patent is limited protection to exclusively practice for a period of time. Chemical process patents are some of the easiest to do a work around. The difference between recovery by conventional methods and the J/L process suggests there is certainly something about the process to protect. I'm not saying that secrecy is the reason for MGAU not to announce the labs, but it's plausible, my speculation. My comment about MXAM's Runyon telling me that some labs didn't want their name disclosed was the lab's desire to not being pestered and investing time (money) in non productive activity talking to someone else's investors.