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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : ABTX - Agribiotech -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jerry carlson who wrote (7579)	2/23/1999 2:18:00 PM
From: c-man	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8359

< Did you get any impression that Thomas will serve a different role in the future?> IMHO, he will step down as CEO in next 3-6 months, maybe even sooner, and either serve as Chairman of Board, maybe just stay on as a Director, or serve in some other capacity (say - consultant). It's kind of obvious Shultz has been put in the limelight now for the cc and for this meeting. Let me say I have no basis for this opinion, other than just a merging of rumors, assumptions, and logic on my part. IMHO, there is no dishonor in a founder leaving or changing positions when the founders' talents are in M&A, industry vision, and not in the consolidation phase....and I think most people involved definitely want his industry vision absolutely tied to this company forever whether he is CEO or not. BTW - yet another example of Evan's incredible skewed reporting....his HEADLINE (AgriBioTech CEO Tells Shareholders His Role to Change) was LITERALLY Thomas' parting, almost passing comments as he closed his speech for the day. Let me say it again - Thomas said, IN PASSING, and you had to be listening to catch it, as it was clearly meant to be just a forward-looking comment, that he might have a different role in the future. He made light of it by saying even if he were a janitor, he would be involved. That Evans found this comment to base a headline on - disingenious and ill-intent at best, inflamatory and skewed at best...but I expected as much. < I gather you believe Evans' reporting will continue to keep investor interest down. > I gather that ABTX is keenly aware of this reporter, his intent, his proven bias, and maybe even some of his relationships w/ a so-called phantom BEAR PARTY. That ABTX is consciously aware of this issue gives me confidence. ABTX is not a 20MM on-the-edge, no-product biotech startup. Where they apply their efforts and resources, I assume fundamentally, they should see results. We'll see the end of it all someday. I can say I am ignoring all class action suits thus far. We all know shareholders never win these. I keep hoping that ag industry specialists will not see it this way. <-- I personally believe the big guys (MACCs) have a few things they want taken care of first before committing....eg. complete, or get substantially started, the consolidation; take the writeoffs; further mature some of the biotech....then, truly, a bidding war will happen. Time for this ? 6-9 months, outside a year. I suspect the ag interests are indeed aware of what's going on...and give "the noise" some space...for now. But the dymnamics and economics of what ABTX offer will become the force to deal with sooner, rather than later. Not to mention who among us doesn't believe that CHEMICAL COMPANIES have as fine legal experts as any single industry, beyond perhaps tobacco, in the world. These guys could tie up MW and the class action guys for years if they wanted to, I suspect. Talk about a battle of two titans. It was comforting to read WSJ's article yesterday that the international economy had EARLY SIGNS of recovering out of the doldrums. Hello Novartis ? And whose Cargill deal died ? More cash sitting in pockets. c-man p.s. pardon the speeling (<- ha) errors no time to go back this afternoon.