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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : PYNG Technologies -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jack Rayfield who wrote (3376)	3/7/1999 12:08:00 AM
From: LOR	Respond to of 8117

Thanks for the positive comments [ GWD, Arikira and Jack Rayfield ] and for the record LOR is a "he"....not that that should matter. I would like to echo Jack in saying that the WR tests were conducted in part to establish how each of the four intraosseous devices would be rated by the medics who evaluated them ""for their specific environments"". This explains why key individuals supervising the tests can say that they would personally prefer the FAST-1 for "normal" military use which by the way would be a significantly larger market then that of "field operations" of the Seals and Special Forces. In the end, I still believe that "PYNG's sales ability" or lack thereof will be a major factor as regards the arrival of "MASS PRODUCTION" orders. With less then 200 uses of the FAST-1 on live bodies I think Mike may have his work cut out for him as potential buyers may well be hesitant about ordering large numbers of the device anytime soon. Also, buyers in general may be well aware that their orders will be crucial to PYNG or BIG getting an early lead in the race to firmly establish themselves as THE main supplier of adult intraosseous devices and would not be above demanding significant price concessions. Still, in my opinion the FAST-1 is a great product and unless Mike is the world's worst salesman [ which I doubt ] it is truly only a matter of time. LOR P.S. GWD, -- regarding whether or not friday's sellers think they can get back in before PYNG heads for the stars perhaps it is possible that they do have "inside" information about the US military's stance on intraosseous devices and might be tipped off when the the military gets prepared to place significant orders....For what it is worth I expect the military to eventually order large quantities of both the FAST-1 and the BIG.

To: Jack Rayfield who wrote (3376)	3/7/1999 10:49:00 AM
From: AriKirA	Respond to of 8117

Thanks for jumping in Jack! We can always count on you to clear things up. Now if we could just find out who was selling Friday. I spent two hours yesterday doing some research and couldn't find anything in this regard. Although, I did come up with some interesting facts. Will let you guys know once I verify said facts. Kind Regards AK

To: Jack Rayfield who wrote (3376)	3/9/1999 11:27:00 AM
From: m. jacobs	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 8117

Dear Jack,I do not know where you get your information from, Walter Reed Army Research Center is just that it has no mandate to make decision on product for any department that I am aware off.The roll for Walter Reed was to evaluate I/O devices including the only sternal access unit the FAST1. There are not four devices that have met the requirements for the military. Special Forces did indeed tests the FAST1 and other products but they were not from the Uniformed Military University as you state. The author of the report from Walter Reed is not even in the country at this time and wont be back for at least two weeks but yet you claim to have received all this information from him I know this person, and he would not provide information on a report to a civilian, over the phone, especially since it has not been released yet. There is no product that I know off that 20 can be held in one hand, the handle alone for the SurFast is the size of a pool ball. All other devices that you describe, except the FAST1, are used in the TIBIA and as such make little sense in a battlefield environment where 70 percent of all injuries are peripheral. If we are going to make speculative comments then at least you can do is get the facts strait. Michael