LUMM - Lumenon Innovative Lightwave Technology Inc.

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
LUMM - Lumenon Innovative Lightwave Technology Inc.

An SI Board Since February 1999

Posts	SubjectMarks	Bans	Symbol
2484	45	0	LUMM

Emcee: Currency	Type: Unmoderated

Introduction Market Data Compact

Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):

Reply	Message Preview	From	Recs	Posted
1684	>I was not impressed by her ability to interpret contracts based upon a desc	Fred McCutcheon	-	3/30/2000
1683	USA TODAY newspaper had a great article on Lumm's industry, no mention of l	Terry Vellequette	-	3/30/2000
1682	<<<learning who to talk to and how to judge>>> Agreed. Been	Don Johnstone	-	3/30/2000
1681	medsunman- I don't want to get into any lengthy evaluation and exposition	Curtis E. Bemis	-	3/30/2000
1680	<i>Rather, her criticisms of LUMM were more like those of an attorney adv	pat mudge	-	3/30/2000
1679	Curtis, Pat may very well be one of the most knowledgeable investors in this se	medsunman	-	3/29/2000
1678	<i>BTW, buy any LUMM?</i> Don, if you remember, I was a LUMM holde	Curtis E. Bemis	-	3/29/2000
1677	Curtis, long time no see. At least not here. I last saw you over on the Frank C	Don Johnstone	-	3/29/2000
1676	Don-- Not losing our objectivity, are we ??	Curtis E. Bemis	-	3/29/2000
1675	<< JDSU takeover of ETEK [...] is being questioned by Alcatel >> T	MangoBoy	-	3/29/2000
1674	On 'buyer beware', in my last post; that was my attempt to tell potenti	Don Johnstone	-	3/29/2000
1673	!Buyer Beware! bookham.com ************************ <b>Bookham Technol	Don Johnstone	-	3/27/2000
1672	That should not surprise you, Bookham is a very respectable private company tha	jjs64	-	3/27/2000
1671	Just visited the Bookham SI thread, which has 0 responses, and then the Bookham	Herc	-	3/27/2000
1670	Will Lumm have a Conference Call? I know several companies with 10 Million $ Ma	fibrehound*	-	3/26/2000
1669	Pat I get your point of how Lumm did not negotiate very good agreements, alth	dds1	-	3/26/2000
1668	Not directed to Pat,...but to all of you, I have a piece of this POS because I	russet	-	3/26/2000
1667	<i>I must differ with you. You have implied not once but twice that MOLX	pat mudge	-	3/26/2000
1666	Pat, I must differ with you. You have implied not once but twice that MOLX has	Yankee Trader	-	3/26/2000
1665	<i>It appears to me that you are implying that MOLX has/is engaging in cr	pat mudge	-	3/26/2000
1664	<i>First, Vincent Belanger is not a Molex representative. He is the CFO o	pat mudge	-	3/26/2000
1663	Pat, It appears to me that you are implying that MOLX has/is engaging in crimi	Yankee Trader	-	3/26/2000
1662	While you point to hyperbole I'd like to point to your errors. First, Vinc	UR_In&Out	-	3/26/2000
1661	Jeepers! This is the absolute, most long winded thread on SI. Gentlemen, plea	Herc	-	3/26/2000
1660	<i>I am not trying to convince anyone on LUMMs prospects. The facts as I	pat mudge	-	3/25/2000

Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):