Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
"You are in the middle of my business, you are squatting 24/7, on an investment chatroom, in a business I am invested in..."
"Besides the share price isn't going to be affected by anything but the announcement of pure hard sales/or lack of such. It is already under the scrutiny of the market place and we will financially live or die by the commercial acceptance of our products...."
Patience WMFT, as you have correctly stated, the future of CDEX lies in the success of Valimed, not RA's "squatting" habits. Most of us have been following this company for over seven years. I think we can all wait a few more months to get a better assessment of the Valimed market.
I have posted several times that we need to give it until the end of the year to get a reliable indication of how well Valimed will sell, probably the first 10Q in '07 will tell the story. However, in all fairness, I believe that the ASD law suit may slow down sales and a reliable assessment may take longer.
The positive outlook I see is that eventually CDEx will reduce the size and cost of Valimed to make it affordable for a higher percentage of the market. What we're witnessing now is a marketing strategy called "price skimming". I fully expect the sales price to be reduced in the future to expand their market.
http://www.tutor2u.net/business/marketing/pricing_strategy_skimming.asp
Ahhhh... a breath of fresh air:
By: scarednomore
26 Jul 2006, 04:25 PM EDT
Msg. 2140 of 2142
(This msg. is a reply to 2139 by inet64.)
inet
I think it is possible that ASD thinks they have a very good case. Does not make any sense to me that their attorneys would chase something they know they cannot win. I doubt that ASD is the least bit concerned about the financial condition of Cdex. If they think they have a case, they just simply want to protect what they think is theirs, broke or rich, IMO, makes no difference
I couldn't agree more, after personally speaking with ASD's Vice President of Technology over a year before the law suit was filed I believe that your opinion is exactly the case.
ASD lawyers were studying the situation for over a year before filing this "shot across the bow". They must be awfully stoopid or awfully thorough.
My guess is the PPS reflects the consensus among seasoned investors.
Rottenapple,
There are 100's of daily news reports about meth users, meth labs, meth trafficing... etc, that have nothing to do with CDEx's meth gun.
There are a reported 1.5 million medical errors per year. How many have any relevance to Valimed? Let's break it down:
- Over 90% of all prescriptions are in the solid dosage form.
- How many of the remaining 10% are liquid prescriptions which are compounded?
- How many of the compounded solutions (liquids) are administered by IV?
- How many of the compounded solutions administered by IV are high-risk medications?
- How many hospitals in the U.S administer compounded, high-risk IV medications?
- How many errors are there per hospital for high-risk, compounded, IV administered medications?
Pick some percentages and do the non-Moontonian Math.
You will see that even with the most conservative numbers, talking about 1.5 miilion medical errors/year has very, very little relevance to Valimed, just like posting every meth-related story on the news has very, very little relevance to the meth gun.
Paige,
"The whole PAT initiave remindes me of the computer chips and vammp in the manufacturing process. How far off base am I?"
Very similar IMO. Both PAT and what Loch/CDEx called VAMMP (now a patented and licensed technolgy developed at Sandia) utilize spectroscopic techniques to monitor the quality of the raw materials used in the manufacturing process.
(Edited) "Remember B Franklin discovered electricity, Edison perfected it somewhat 100 years later. Where has it gone since then. Was the whole century being scammed all along."
No mention of James Clerk Maxwell? :(
http://www.sonnetsoftware.com/bio/maxwell.asp
There's a lot of them paige, the most internationally recognized (and used) trace detection method is a small "kit" that sells for about 20 bucks a pop.
Look up "NIK".
At the beginning of 2005, the United States Supreme Court ruled that a motorist's fourth amendment right was not violated by a drug-sniffing dog.
Or meth sniffing device????
http://www.chestnutcafe.com/cafe/probable_cause.html
CCM introduces Trace Drug Detection Technology.
http://www.ccm-drugtest.com/trace_det1.htm
Finding Drugs by Finding Traces
Another aid to drug interdiction
http://tracedetection.com/media_1/media_2_a.html
An interesting read as to what constitutes a legal police search based on probable cause:
The whole article is good. Here's an excerpt:
"However, use of sophisticated devices to enhance the
officers' observation powers to reveal things not visible with
the naked eye from some lawful vantage point will likely
constitute a search. Thus, when police used a 600-millimeter
camera lens from a distance of 100 yards (the nearest point the
officers had a right to be) to glimpse through the fan louvers of
an opaque greenhouse surrounded by brush and two fences, their
observations of marijuana plants were held to be a search. (20)
Therefore, if the use of enhancement devices is contemplated
during a surveillance, absent emergency circumstances, a valid
search warrant should be obtained prior to its institution."
http://www.totse.com/en/law/justice_for_all/curtilag.html
IN LAY TERMS...THAT'S ULTRA-VIOLET LIGHT THAT ILLUMINATES EVEN THE SMALLEST AMOUNTS OF METHAMPHETAMINE.
"You would aim, point, shoot--and it would say meth for truly invisible quantities on the contaminated surface."
http://www.kold.com/Global/story.asp?S=5148339
Rottenapple,
WMFT needs to cut his loses and just admit his mistake and shut up.
His latest excuse for incorrectly calculating Mari's share average doesn't even make sense:
"I saw 2 transactions and averaged them as you can see below: I did not compute any other quanities or values which you brought in.
2.75 + .30= 3.05~2=1.52
My math is correct with the above figures"
LMAO!!! Yep it sure is WMFT if those "2 transactions" that you saw were for only one share at 2.75/share and one share at .30/share.
Then your math for calculating average cost per share would be correct!
Crow,
"See DIDDY..the CAP comes dang close to saying that Valimed tests for sterility."
I was ROTF when he made those posts.
If Valimed DOES tested for sterility I would expect a clear, plain and simple refernece where CDEX makes that claim.
If Valimed DOES NOT test for sterility I would expect exactly what cappy posted out of frustration. LOL!!
At least Ontheedge gave an honest answer!
"Valimed does not differentiate between sterility and non-sterility, nor does it claim to do so diddy. You like to add your flavor to things to give a different impression of the real facts. Can you produce one fact where Valimed claims it can? No, would be the correct answer."
Above excerpt posted by Ontheedge (post 8291).
As a CDEX insider and PP investor (the very first one I believe) I thank you very making "the real facts" perfectly clear:
Valimed does not differentiate between sterility and non-sterility...
You're a trooper!
"In 05 ValiMed started getting acceptance from the testing hospitals"
CDEX PR's and 10Q's never made it clear exacting what the role of these teaching hospitals were. We now know that they were partners involved in the development and testing of the Valimed prototypes.
As I posted earlier, I remain very curious how many hospitals will purchased prodcution Valimed units as true, end-use customers and not partners.
Since every past "placement" or "delivery" of a prototype Valimed unit has been followewd with a PR, I am expecting the same for their first true, full-price-tag sale.
I think everyone will agree that that is a very good indicator for the market success of Valimed.
Nolajo999, I truly don't believe many people read much into those posts anymore. A quick scan maybe, but not much more. The links and excerpts are repeated endlessly- over and over again.
My observation is that after excessive and sensational promoting, posts of this type become self regulating!
No need Crow, no one is left claimimg or even hinting that Valimed will test for sterility.
What valimed does is test for something which IS NOT MANDATORY. Valimed is a convenience and a redundant QA.
Testing for sterility IS MANDATORY.
Conclusion: Valimed is an additional QA tool to help pharmacists. It is not a solution for the mandatory requiremnts of USP 797.
Does either CDEX or Baxa have a single true customer which has not been a partner in the Valimed development program? Has there been a single customer that has bought a next generation Valimed production model for the full sales price? I am patiently waiting to receive some information that will give us an indication of how well these units will sell.
Crow, this functional description of Valimed was not written by CDEx promoters. Notice the the word "sterile" is no where to be found, only drug identity and concentration.
Excerpt:
"In addition to providing various educational and consulting services to healthcare organizations, Baxa offers the ValiMedTM Medication Validation System, a fluorescence fingerprinting system designed to help pharmacists meet USP 797 and JCAHO testing requirements for drug identity and concentration."
Posted by Pookie on the RCL board:
http://cr.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?ARTICLE_ID=259401&p=15&cat=Feat
The more I read hype about a meth gun that may hit the market a year from now, the more I become suspicious and think it is a diversion to draw attention away from the immediacy of NOW:
- the financial deficit of CDEx
- The negative cash flow of CDEX
- The stated inability of CDEx to continue executing their business plan after June 30, 2006
And most importantly:
- The success of the marketing model for Valimed
- The use of the same marketing model for the meth gun
- No PR's announcing funding
- No PR's announcing sales or "delivery" of Valimed units as CDEX has always released in the past.
I continue to find these definitions to be extremely applicable with the CDEx message boards:
Technological hype is sensational promotion of technology. It can refer to a particular product or a range of related pieces of technology that use the same operating principle or offer similar benefits. Alternatively it can apply to all technology that is promoted as offering improvements in the quality of life or productivity. Technological hype can be generated by individual companies, corporations, industry associations, whole governments or individuals. As most technology is developed by profit-making organisations, the hype is generated to maximise sales of the new technology. Governments may promote technology in this way as part of a drive to improve the quality of life, improve the economy or respond to industry lobbyists. Individuals who promote a given technology may be researchers or inventors interested in gaining publicity or finding a commercial application for their work. Some individuals also advocate a given technology out of the belief that it offers personal or societal benefits.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hype_(information_technology)
Have a great weekend everyone!!
Outstanding CDEX shares as of of July 21, 2006:
36,782,846
Source: http://www.natco.org/
That was interesting. This caught my eye:
"The infrared device invaded the home in the sense the device was able to gather information about the interior of the defendant's home that could not be obtained by naked eye observations.
Because the meth gun's technology has never been used at crime scenes before, it will have to face court challenges to its admissibility, said Tucson Police Sgt. Mark Garcia, who works in the department's narcotics unit. Like the radar gun, the meth gun will probably have to go through lengthy use in the field.
"Something like that will have to go through all the legal hurdles of acceptance," Garcia said.
"I believe it will have to be "certified" that a positive is in fact meth and what are the probabilities of errors."
Methamphetamine- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine
Amphetamine- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphetamine
Ephedrine- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephedrine
Pseudoephedrine- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoephedrine
So Xeno, can a cop use the meth gun to obtain PC or would that take a search warrant?
I remember at one time if you were pulled over and caught with an open container the officer couldn't search the entire car. For example, if the officer found a joint in a closed ashtray (which he opened) it was not admissible in court
Things change.
Sorry Xeno, isn't that what disposable gloves are for?
LOL! That's why I suggested to these promotional guys to just relax, calm down and breath oxygen.
They're not thinking (or writing) clearly out of pure excitement!
LOL!!
Xeno,
Peroxide-based explosives are strongly fluorescent like meth- a phenylethylamine.
I wonder if the gun will be able to distinguish between some of the commonly found phenylethylamine derivatives?:
Methamphetamine- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine
Amphetamine- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphetamine
Ephedrine- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephedrine
Pseudoephedrine- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoephedrine
LOL! Raiderman posts:
"This techonology is truly revolutionary and could not only end up in every police cruiser, but also every border crossing in the US."
While the Arizona Daily Star quotes CDEX company officials(excerpt):
"While the science behind finding drugs with ultraviolet light is nothing new, company officials said, this "meth gun" is the first product to make the technology portable."
Relax, stay calm and please don't shout, there's still a long road ahead before the meth gun is going to save this company.
Gawd, you guys can be funny at times!
Well Xeno, maybe they can only use it at night? LOL
I'm not sure what this means...
The devices being field-tested will test only for meth, but the mass-produced devices will test for meth, cocaine, marijuana, heroin and peroxide-based explosives — which are similar chemically to meth, company officials said.
"They don't have to know what drug they are looking for," Foster said.
It doesn't appear as if the meth gun will work like Valimed, where the operator enters the signature to be tested nor will it test for concentration, only presence.
If the operator doesn't need to know what it is, then the gun probably checks the scan against known signatures. If that's the case, I suppose it'll need that "colored LCD display" to ID the chemical detected if it's testing for anything more than just meth.
But that version is a couple years away IMO.
After talking with several knowledgable people, the gun would be a good tool to check for meth lab clean-up if it can be certified for that purpose. After a bust, a meth lab must be cleaned, then certified. Right now in CA they take a 3 inch wipe from a surface and send it to a lad for testing. The gun would definitely be an improvement. Grant money is available to find ways to facilitate this process in CA.
AFA the guns use to collect evidence, well that's going to be an issue as we've discussed earlier.
In the article, Sgt. Garcia seems to be dismissing it as a tool to gather evidence (at lesat in the short term), but acknowledges its use as a clean-up tool:
Because the meth gun's technology has never been used at crime scenes before, it will have to face court challenges to its admissibility, said Tucson Police Sgt. Mark Garcia, who works in the department's narcotics unit. Like the radar gun, the meth gun will probably have to go through lengthy use in the field.
"Something like that will have to go through all the legal hurdles of acceptance," Garcia said.
The chemical field tests used by police have been ruled admissible in court, he said.
The product does interest him though, he said.
"It could be very helpful in meth cleanup," Garcia said.
INET,
"CDEX, which has its executive offices in Rockville, Md., will put prototypes into field tests on the East Coast starting in August and plans to begin sale of the gun by March."
Maybe you're right, another beta partner?
I wouldn't read into it too much Rotten, maybe the reporter just needs a geography lesson. Besides there are people here on the West coast that think everything east of the Rockies is the East coast!
When it comes to CDEX stock promoters, I find the various definitions of this word to be so surprisingly accurate, it put an instant grin on my face...
hype
[Informal]
n
1 deception or fraud
2 extravagant or excessive promotion
vt.
hyped, hyping
1 to deceive or con
2 to promote in a sensational way
deleted
There were no institutional buys at 1.30/share?
Posted by: ontheedge01
In reply to: scarednomore who wrote msg# 5704 Date:11/30/2005 10:30:13 PM
Post #of 13265
Excerpt:
{i}"I may be wrong Scared, but I hope I am not, if this stock is not well above $2.00 buy the time real revenue's are annouced, then there were no institional buying."
Your track record has been.... well, not so good Edgy, but this time I think you've finally got it right!
"...if this stock is not well above $2.00 buy the time real revenue's are annouced, then there were no institional buying."
Another Ontheedge gem:
Posted by: ontheedge01
In reply to: scarednomore who wrote msg# 5696 Date:11/30/2005 7:23:29 PM
Post #of 13264
Excerpt:
"...the biggest gainers are those who buy on rumors and sell on the facts."
"Your varibles have already cost you a move from 85 cents to a $1.30. 10,000 shares was $8,500, but it is now $13,000. I will make a guess, I will say that the highest price of CDEX, prior to any revenue annoucement, will be a greater move than the movement over the first week after the revenue annoucement. We have already seen a 53% movement if we use 85 cents as our base. I think the real movement started the week on November 29, 2004."
Yet another "OOPS" for Edgy!
In reality the "big move" Edgy was pitching had already taken place. The Baxa news and the information about the upcoming Vegas show in December had already moved the PPS to very near peak on or about the time of his post on November 30.
Not even the promotional skills of capnmike's "wow" report after the show could hold the PPS.
Posted by: ontheedge01
In reply to: lmorovan who wrote msg# 5606 Date:11/22/2005 12:09:27 PM
Post #of 13261
Excerpt:
"I am concerned about my average in this company. I just believe if you are still in it, and have a $65 to $95 average, why not look to average down. Baxa is for real lmorovan, and I am expressing an opinion as to what an investor might consider if he has the average you claim he has.
When Baxa starts distribution of the CDEX products and the share price goes to $2 or $5 or $10 dollars, what has your buddy whose average is at $65 to $95 gained? Only a little less overall loss. But, if he considers investing a little more money because of the Baxa news, maybe he brings his average down to $3 or $5 or $8 bucks."
OOPS again Edgy!
Sometimes investing more money means losing more money!
"Average down" be damned!
Maybe if instead of investing more money, the advise should have been to liquidate your investment entirely and take your tax write-off. The write-off would have saved an investor more money per share than the stock is currently worth.
If the investor sold at 1.20 and wished to buy back in NOW, they could have more than tripled their position if they reinvested, or equivalenlty, averaged down about 66%. That is how to average down without risking more money and taking a nice tax break as well.
Be careful who's opinion you consider "good advise".
Posted by: ontheedge01
In reply to: scarednomore who wrote msg# 5365
11/04/2005
Excerpt:
" view company's like CDEX as one would options. The value today is either low or high to the value in the future. If I could buy a $1.50 call option on CDEX for March or April 2006 @ say, 5 cents, I would buy 10,000 options. If there were puts available on a March or April 2006 50 cent put @ 5 cents, I would buy 2,000 options.
My logic here is as you have stated, By February 2006, if not sooner, I would speculate, we will all know which way CDEX stock price is going to trend. I believe the chances are 5 times greater it will go higher than $1.50, before it goes lower than .50 cents."
I believe that you were wrong on that call Edgy, but hang in there.
OT: Didn't "diddy" from the RB public message board "TM" that moniker several years ago?
Someone oughta have a talk with the original "diddy" and advise the poster to talk with an attorney about registering the mark! LOL
Cappy, question for ya: What's the difference between the old "diddy and the new "diddy"?
Hint: It's as plain as black and White.