alive and kicking
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.
I want to make it clear that I waiting now and have no intention of buying GTCB right. Part of the reason is I amwainitng to see how the vote goes. The other is precisely because there could still be a wave of tax loss selling coming before the end of the year, in all stocks, not just GTCB. I have this view not only for GTCB, but also for the other two biotechs that I have been slowly buying in the past few months, ONXX and PGNX.
ONXX and PGNX are far different than GTCB in having lots of cash on hand and no debt, so no need to raise cash. Both have approved products whose future is bright. PGNX has a bigger pipeline, but ONXX has a likely blockbuster in Nexavar. Both are tempting buyout targets, but I am increasing my shares of them because of their intrinsic prospects, not their buyout potential. John Bits knows virtually nothing about PGNX, as my unpleasant recent exchanges with him revealed on the yahoo board, but that doesn't stop him from making prounouncements about it. In this case he is correct. PGNX does make a tempting buyout target but the price would have to buy far higher than it is now, perhaps close to triple before I would even consider it.
Dodah_2,
Yes it has been a long ride but I haven't been in GTCB as long as you. I think I bought my first shares in 2002 or 2003. It must ahve been a wild ride in 2000. Did you manage to take some money off the table when GTCB was really high up in 2000?
As Cox said, GTCB will survive in some form, but I am not sure how much the current and long time shareholders will get out of it. Cox and the current executives will have nothing to worry about, that is for sure.
I wish you all the best. While it does suck to lose money, and still face the prospect of losing more, there are far more important and valuable things. Enjoy and savor the little things that are around you each day, and you will have a more pleasant and worth while life. Many people in the world have a miserable existence and the lives we lead would be a dream that they could never envision as a reality. Life is short, so enjoy.
To everyone here, have a Happy Thanksgiving and I hope you are lucky enough to enjoy it with your loved ones.
Go seek,
Sorry but I flew off the handle a bit. I think reading about what nivasvs said about his IRA set me off. I wish I had known because I would have said that was too big of a risk to take with any company. I am so sorry and I hope you will be able to recover in time nivasvs.
Go seek, your points are well taken. Cox or some other well paid executive should have said something along those lines to reassure shareholders. Cost cutting and a recognition of the need to not dilute to oblivion might have helped.
Jesse, you are right that Cox did take the time to respond, so we shoud be grateful to him. However, shareholders would have preferred a bit more concrete actions to prevent getting us to where we now are.
I too am down just over 90% but I don't have nearly as much invested as many here have described. All I can say is wow at the sums people have been talking about. It takes a long time to get to run a laboratory in academia and the job doesn't pay well, so I didn't have that much to invest in dollar terms. However, but it was still a substantial investment in my eyes and more that I would like to be down, especially compared to my net worth.
I am going to hold onto my shares and vote for the LFB deal. I agree with go seek that we need rATIII. With both Ovation and now LFB having a piece of it, the eventual sale of GTCB to them should get us back significantly more than $0.11 a share but nowhere near what GTCB would have been worth if the executives cared at all about shareholder value. Of course this may not happen if the deal is rejected so it is a risk. It might be wise to take some money off the table and let the rest ride, even at this low price. However, I am considering doing something very stupid by rolling the dice and buying more shares if, or more likely when, the price drops under $0.10 with the knowledge that I could be quickly pissing a small amount more of my money away. Since I am down 90%, it won't take much cash to dramatically lower my price average. If I do, it is in no way a vote of confidence in GTCB management, since I hold them in contempt, but rather that there will be something of value for Ovation to bargain for if rATIII gets approved.
Jesse and goseek,
Thanks for posting the Cox letter. Yes it does show a complete lack of concern for current shareholders. Let's look at the head count. He says approximately half of 156, so let's say 75 employees are devoted to animals and 81 to other duties. What about the other 81 employees? Why can't you reduce or defer salary for animal care workers since this is a crisis and survival is at stake? I don't want to cut corners on animal care, but this speaks to a reckless expansion of drug producing animals in great excess of GTCB's capacity to fund them. Fine, make the transgenic cell lines or make the embryos, but there is no way GTCB could have afforded to maintain production animals and work out the purification methodology for every single product they are talking about. Good management would have prioritized and picked a few to proceed with and freeze away the rest for future usage when the financial crisis is over. Unless of course you could get one or more of the partners to fund the ENTIRE process in exchange for them getting a bigger cut of profits 5 years down the line. It might have been nice to get a loan as well. Management screwed up in the past by pushing to expand the number of products in development without regard to financing. However, good management could even now freeze away embryos or sperm and preserve the projects but not spend any more money. This way they could reduce the staff caring for animals to any deemed essential to the near term future or GTCB, which are the rATIII producers.
Well, those blunders are in the past. Now Cox says LFB has defrayed some of the infrastructure costs and paying for the all the costs of the collaborative programs in 2008. That is nice, but it is a bit too late. It also means that all the losses in 2008 are due to operations expenses outside of those directly associated with production, including the 81 other employees. They have generated $16 million in losses in the first 3 quarters, despite the revenues coming from Pharmathene, Merrimack and the rATIII milestones. Let's say GTCB got about $15 million from other sources so their total expenditures, so they have really spent about $30 million this year outside of production. That seems like a hell of a lot of expenses unrelated to animal care and production for 81 employees. Unless Cox is not including the cost of salaries for animal care employees in his comments that LFB is funding all the costs of their collaborative programs. This would mean that LFB is not really funding the entire cost of the programs.
In any event, he says nearly all the employees are involved in functions required for public companies, including accounting and legal requirements. Then 1) fire, layoff or reduce salaries of those employees not involved in these essential events. Just reduce the salaries and possibly the number of employees involved in these supposed essential function since there is no way they are operating at 100% efficiency. Reduce the salaries of the executives, and the people who made the lousy deals with Leo and Ovation, since neither included any real up front money or loans for GTCB to use. The Ovation deal really sucked since rATIII was already approved in Europe so we should have gotten more up front money and a loan. The idiots who didn't get any kind of performance, or lack thereof, penalties from LEO as part of the deal should also be reduced in salary or fired.
I can see that Cox thinks he has done a stellar job so won't even consider a cut in salary, or being paid entirely in stock options to save cash. I mean after all, they are building a company for the future, so he should leap at the chance to get shares this cheap.
Oldberkeley and nivasvs,
I am thinking along the lines of you both. I almost did sell some the friday before the latest LFB dilution was announced, but I hesitated. That was at $0.40 but it does seem too late to sell now. I am starting to think along the lines of Jesse, that it is better to vote for the crappy and very shareholder unfriendly deal that the piss poor GTCB executives managed to work out. I would more inclined to vote for it is those idiots would at least try and make some cuts and or fire Cox, but they don't seem to care at all about shareholders.
Jesse,
Did you ever get a response from GTCB about why they haven't instituted any real measures to cut costs? They need to get into August on the money they get from the big dilution LFB for very little money, just in case the FDA delays their decision on rATIII.
I haven't voted yet. I will email Tom Newbery again first. GTCB will get $10 million in operational funds from the proposed LFB deal, which they state will take them into about June 2009 (7 months). What I would like to see is GTCB management step forward and say they will cut at least $5 million in expenses NOW so that they will in essence buy 50% more time since they will have $15 million more to work with (10 months). Cox could cut his cash salary to ZERO and take only stock options to save nearly $500K or almost 10% of the total proposed savings. They can get the remaining savings from other executive salaries as well as other salaries and expenses. I need to see some commitment to reducing costs, even if it is only $2 million, which would be met by 25% by Cox's salary reduction alone. If he won't do that then buy $600K worth of GTCB stock, or one year's salary.
It would also be nice if Cox actually discussed in some detail why rATIII sales are so low in Europe, what he plans to do to increase more rATIII sales in Europe, when he thinks the label in Europe will expand to pregnant women with HD. It would also be nice if he would explain why the US would be different so that we shouldn't think that the same trivial rATIII sales won't happen after FDA approval in the US. In short, it would be nice if he or some other highly paid executive would try and earn their salaries by giving some real information to current shareholders, or prospective new shareholders. Trust in management is great but based on the past, they need to do something more or different to win a bit more. MAKING PHONE CALLS TO TELL ME TO VOTE YES JUST DOESN'T CUT IT.
Oldberkeley,
Thanks for the timely use of humor. We need that more than ever.
Vinny
P.S. Were you wearing a parachute?
Go seek,
I read your link and am wondering who is the biggest bullsh*t artist, Cox or the LEO chairman. Here is what each posted at the time of the Leo deal. Maybe we should have a contest. I vote Cox since he was raving about Leo and claimed to be looking forward to working with them. Perhaps Cox forgot the phone number for Leo so he couldn't inquire about the continual delays in getting the DIC trial going. I would like to vote for the LFB proposals, but I am going to have to see some recognition by Cox that they will cut costs after the deal has been approved. Perhaps someone should tell Cox about the value of real or even symolic moves in a time of crisis.
Here is Cox;
"LEO is an excellent partner for the ATryn® program with a strong strategic interest in products for Critical Care and the management of coagulation. LEO clearly understands the opportunity for creating significant markets for ATryn®. We look forward to working with LEO in developing ATryn® in acquired deficiency indications," stated Geoffrey F. Cox, Ph.D., GTC's Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer.
Here is the LEO CEO:
"LEO is firmly committed to establishing the Critical Care area as a strong and growing segment of our business. ATryn® has significant growth potential and is a natural extension of our current Critical Care portfolio. We are pleased to work with GTC to bring the first recombinant antithrombin product to our markets. Also, we are delighted that ATryn® will be the first antithrombin product that would be approved in all the countries of the European Union, providing a consistent and secure source of supply to all of our customers," says Ernst Lunding, President and Chief Executive Officer of LEO.
Dew,
I was just throwing out a ballpark number. However, I find it hard to believe that they can't cut 5% or 10% now, by salary reduction for executives and even laying off some of them. I would expect a good managment would do cutting after the LFB deal passes in order to stretch out the cash as long as possible.
I do agree that the wasted time after rATIII approval in Europe is far more damning. Even worse in my view is that the DIC trial wasn't made the major priority for GTCB, and that they let LEO waste so much time. I mean it is GTCB's only approved drug and the potential market dwarfs HD. They should have been making LEO's life miserable by continually pressing them. As far as DIC, I think it the phase II DIC shows some really good data in phase II, that will be a real positive since the market is so large.
Jesse,
Cox and the board aren't doing everything they can. They haven't made any real moves to cut cash burn, to cut executive salaries, to lay off workers. No. GTCB is in trouble, but do they shelve projects that won't come to fruition for 5 or 10 years? No, they keep everything going as if they had unlimited cash. Yes it would suck if people were laid off, but that is business. GTCB needs to think near term for now, and then expand back when the cash situation improves. If GTCB doesn't want to cut 30% of its work force, then reduce everyone's salaries by 30%. If Cox cares so much about the workers, then he can take all of his salary in stock and the $600K can be used to let several employees keep their jobs.
If Newberry did mock the $90 million deal, as Dew said, then he is more clueless than I imagined. If we had been able to sell the rights to one of our projects for $90 million, we could have avoided major dilution over the past two years. Didn't we dilute about 40% over that time? Let's fantasize and say that GTCB pulls out of it and becomes a $1 billion dollar company in two years. Our share of that $1 billion is now only $600 million due to the 40% dilution. That means the current shareholders lost $400 million in value because GTCB and Newberry mocked a $90 million payment.
biopearl,
You are exactly right. There is no way Genzyme would keep GTCB on its books since the losses that accrue during development would destroy their bottom line. They did what any smart company would do, spin off GTCB and take shares in the company. I worked in a big pharma prior to going to graduate shcool. They do not like to take risks for the same reasons why Genzyme spun off GTCB and they are very short sighted. Big pharma would rather wait until after a concept has been proven, and then buy back in even if it costs them far more than if they got in early. No big executive wants to put themselves on the line with a failure that doesn't pan out. In the case of GTCB, it means waiting until FDA approval or rATIII, and quite possibly even for FOB legislation passage for the doors to be open wide for big pharma.
As DEW explained so well what happened with some big companies who contracted with GTCB. I would also point out that some of these antibodies were often undisclosed and in pre-clinical status, so like what happened with Merrimack or PGNX, they could have failed trials, or been shelved for more promising internal projects, respectively. That is why GTCB's shift into making rare or hard to produce plasma proteins is a much better approach. Too bad that wasn't the direction from the start.
My whole point for raising these issues was to illustrate the distortions and misrepresentations from Johnbits.
Biopearl,
If you look on the Yahoo board for posts by bits, you will see his comments that the GTCB platform, isn't now, nor ever was viable. This was the thread where he called GTCB smoke and mirrors. Here is something from one of his posts.
<The weight of evidence is that no one within the drug industry ever believed in the GTC intial businees model. The evidence is overwhelming.
Genzyme got rid of the company because in their opinion the business model wouldn't work. Genzyme could have easily supported GTC if they thought there was a real gold mine there. Big phrama is hungry for pipeline and for profits. Big phrama takes a lot of risks and are always teaming up with promising small biotechs. They seldom spin them off unless they think that is a failed approach.
Insiders didn't buy in those years because also knew the business model wouldn't work.>
Here is more form bits where he tries to dismiss GTCB. Notice he doesn't include the Pharmathene and Pharming deals. I guess they are too dumb to realize that the GTCB transgenics platform isn't a viable option.
<GTC business model was that they could reduce the cost of production of existing drugs. What happened to the programs with Abbott, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Centocor, Elan, Alexion, ImmunoGen, Merrimack and Progenics? Is production really cheaper after considering all costs? Why haven’t any of these programs succeeded? Surely some like Abbott, Bristol-Myers Squibb have the money to move ahead, they have the money to have bought out GTC, but instead what has happened? Why is that?
GTC said,, “Plasma derived antithrombin is currently marketed in Europe, Japan and the United States with annual worldwide sales of $250M. Overall sales of this product have been limited in various markets and is highly dependent on the available supply.”
Why are sales of rATIII so poor now that the supply issue has been solved?
That is the 80% part of the smoke.>
go seek,
Johnbits has been saying GTCB is all smoke and mirrors on the Yahoo board. He claims GTCB has been lying and deceiving investors akin to the scams run by companies like INGN or Countrywide. Of course this is non-sense and I challenged him on it but he refuses to change this view to one where they have a viable product but are poorly managed financially. His insistence on calling GTCB a scam should tell you all you need to know about him.
Bits claims that Merrimack and PGNX dropped their projects with GTCB because they don't believe in GTCB's platform to produce proteins can be viable. When I pointed out to him that both Merrimack and PGNX dropped their partnerships for reasons directly related to their proteins and completely unrelated to GTCB, he refuses to correct his errors. On the contrary, he repeated the lies about Merrimack. The truth is that PGNX put their project (PRO542) with GTCB on hold to move a different compound (PRO140) into trials, and it has shown stellar results in phase II trials. Merrimack's MM-093 didn't perform well in trials so has been halted by Merrimack. It is true both events were negative for GTCB, but we need to deal with facts, not lies spread by Johnbits.
Bits also claims to know that a long time basher on the Yahoo board, investor888 is actually a positive poster here but when I challenged him to name the person who posts here, he just ran away and hid. He likes to attack people who own GTCB but won't say what stocks he does own or likes. He is both a liar and a coward.
Okay, You guys convinced me. Here is the letter. I was pissed off so forgot to write my name on it, but will do that in my next correspondence.
<Please do me the courtesy of telling me your actual name when you send
notes looking for an exchange of information and ideas.
In the meantime, recognizing that you are feeling angry by the market
action on small biotech generally, and GTCB in particular, please allow
me the opportunity to share some thoughts with you that come from all
the communication that we have already engaged in with the public.
Over just the last 6 months, GTC has out licensed the fibrinogen program
to Pharming, entered a strategic relationship with OVATION for the
development of ATryn(r) in the US, completed the BLA submission,
obtained priority review status with the FDA, advanced the review
process through the inspections of our clinical sites, reported second
and third quarter financial results with both quarters showing improving
revenue and lower net costs with respect to the same periods in 2007,
reported on issues with Nasdaq listing requirements and LEO's internal
strategic review decision on ATryn, and obtained an important commitment
from LFB (both a strategic collaborator and an existing investor that
sits on our board) to provide bridge financing to get us past the FDA
action date. All this has been accomplished in an environment of
severely deteriorating financial markets that have battered the small
biotech industry.
In addition, we have stated that there have been small sales of ATryn in
the EU as well as work on the DIC study and that we feel LFB has the
capability to do more as we work to transition this effort from LEO.
Your suggestions for cutting costs have also been addressed in our
earlier conference calls. While many early stage and discovery oriented
companies can cut efforts without severely affecting their lead programs
in the short term, we are a commercial production operation under
regulatory review. Cost cutting that would be meaningful would lead to
gutting the very infrastructure which is required for product approval
and support for the partnered programs that are bringing in revenue.
Your thoughts on symbolic reductions of senior management base salaries
has not been considered since it may lead to a loss of the talent and
capabilities that we are depending on to reach our strategic goals.
Senior management has embraced receiving primarily stock for the bonuses
that recognize our meeting GTC's operating and strategic goals. These
are reported as cash values although both stock grants and option awards
are all significantly underwater.
GTC will continue to utilize the progress of our product programs and
strengths of our strategic relationships to chart our way through the
challenges we face. Ultimately, it will be the success of the products
that bring GTC through to commercialization. Our record of real
accomplishments and meeting emerging issues in a rational way is
difficult for any other small biotech company to match and many are not
- being forced into shut down, distressed sales, bankruptcy, or asset
sales that result in cash but no remaining significant pipeline.
We remain focused on bringing the company, and ultimately our
shareholders, through to becoming a larger commercial enterprise where
we can more meaningfully grow to add more intrinsic value than exists
today.>
<I'm pleading temporary insanity:>
What do you mean temporary?
Lew and Dew,
Thanks for your comment. I was thinking more along the lines of whether Tom object or be unhappy if I reposted his comments verbatim.
Vinny
Oldberkeley,
I will try and post when I can. My comment about financial companies refusing to lower executive salaries because they feared losing the best employees was meant to reflect Tom's answer and GTCB's position. It is essentially why GTCB won't consider reducing executive salaries, even symbolic ones. I am not sure if I am allowed to post verbatim what I was told, but I will contact Tom again to ask him as well as to follow up. Tom also feels GTCB has covered the issue of cost cutting in previous conference calls. I don't recall it being mentioned as being a priority or as having some urgency, but maybe I am wrong. My feeling from his message is that GTCB doesn't think they can or doesn't feel the need to cut costs because it would be at the expense of future long term goals. I am kind of stunned and disappointed that GTCB hasn't realized that this is financial crisis means every dollar saved translates into less dilution at time when new cash extracts a very high price, and also gives GTCB more time before another dilution to raise cash. I didn't get any feel for a sense of urgeny to prioritize efforts. I understand not cutting rATIII since that is our most advanced product, and that is why I have been pissed about how little has happened in Europe with rATIII regarding sales and the slow movement of the DIC trials. But how can stopping some, most or even all projects until rATIII is approved not be on the agenda?
As far as rATIII sales in Europe, I am unaware of any real information being given to GTCB shareholders. Tom says they have stated rATIII sales in Europe have been small. Unless I am mistaken, there hasn't been much else regarding this topic. I would like some reasons why slaes remain so low, what GTCB is planning to do to increase sales, what sales are in each country right now, how many countries there are where can rATIII be sold and timetables for when they expect most or all countries to have rATIII available for sales. l will ask these questions in my next email to Tom.
Flo,
Rest assured that my investing in GTCB was completely my own idea. GTCB isn't dead yet but it is on life support.
Apparently, GTCB didn't consider executive paycuts because they don't want to lose the best people. That sounds like the non-sense financial companies were spouting after the meltdown. No one is responsible or feels the need to take a salary hit as the shareholders get hammered into the ground. I had some thoughts about the executives of financial companies that were bailed out. These were "if that is what the A team did, then it is time for the B team to get a chance" or "we can give the jobs to new people at far lower salaries. Even if they screwed up the companies as bad as the original executives, it would still be a bargain because it would cost less". The GTCB executives who kept expanding costs by starting new projects and not concentrating resources on rATIII until FDA approval are at fault. Yes it is good to have multiple projects but GTCB could afford at most a very few other projects until FDA approval was granted or the DIC showed some promise. It would be a different story if a partner came in and covered all the expenses, but unless I am mistaken, that wasn't the case.
I did receive a repaid and deaitled response to my letter from Tom Newbury, and he is to be commended for this. I will discuss his response hopefully later today. I was pleased by some but very disappointed by other parts.
Acgood,
You hit the nail on the head. The complete lack of any management effort to reduce cash burn is the most galling aspect of their failure. This is what I just sent to Tom Newberry. I expect him to ignore it but it made me feel better. I didn't include the issue of how little it cost cutting it would have taken over the past two years to match the entire amount of the LFB "investment" in GTCB, and that would have preserved shareholder value.
Dear Tom,
As I watch my long time investment in GTCB being reduced to close to nothing, I am still stunned by the major failures of management. Everyone knew that cash reserves have been a major weakness for quite sometime and will remain such. I had high hope for the US partnership in rATIII but the Ovation deal was a great disappointment as it brought in only a minor amount of up front cash and near term milestones payable upon FDA approval. No real news has been available about rATIII sales in Europe, or lack thereof. No real explanations why rATIII sales in Europe have been non-existant or the plans to correct this have been provided.
What is truly stunning to me is that even at this late date, management has not made lowering cash burn a priority, or even given it any real lip service. Dr. Cox keeps stating his unhappiness or even anger at the low stock price, but fails to take concrete actions to combat it and preserve the small remaining shareholder value. Never once has top management, especially Dr. Cox, ever stated they would begin trimming costs by reducing their salaries. As a leader, that should have been done as an example of their seriousness. If they were too concerned about maintaining their financial rewards to accept a salary reduction, why haven't they accepted GTCB stock instead of some or all of their salaries? The latter would have provided a clear message of their faith in the future of GTCB. If I do not see such acknowlegements of the importnance of reducing cash burn and cash payments to executives, I will vote against the LFB deal and urge as many other shareholders to do the same.
I am kind of pissed at myself. I thought about lightening up on friday when the price hit $0.40, but I stopped because of the old idea about smart money or leaks with buyers on friday. Today's news is diasappointing, but as Dew points out, the good news is that GTCB did manage to buy some time to get us to the FDA decision. But we needed to get more of a cushion, so reducing cash burn should still be on the plate even if it is more symbolic than effective now at this late date. Remember, the stock price was at $0.28 about a week ago, so the drop from $0.40 to $0.25 sucks, but isn't that much worse than a drop from $0.28.
Did Cox say anything about lowering the cash burn and cutting executive salaries, or is he still in denial? I do think Cox has to go because he never even raised this issue, which should have been done more than a year ago. Cox has to go because GTCB didn't make a priority for getting a deal in Japan. Cox has to go because the LEO deal turned out pretty bad. I understand they needed a partner and LEO gotten before EMEA approval. However, LEO had all the cards GTCB was at their complete mercy. LEO did nothing to move rATIII sales forward and I haven't heard about any sales figures. Maybe LEO set the price too high or maybe they didn't have the sales team to push rATIII. But either Cox is responsible for aggreeing to the terms of the deal that left GTCB with no leverage, or GTCB had leverage but Cox didn't use it to force LEO to move faster, especially with regard to the all important DIC trials.
I am glad that LEO is out and LFB will take over their role. The negative is that the DIC trials have temporarily stopped recruiting patients so lets hope that the deal is completed quickly and the DIC trial recruitment takes on new urgency. I also hope that LFB moves quickly to get rATIII label expansion into pregnant women with HD deficiency in Europe. Did Cox even bring this up as a priority in Europe, or his he clueless on this front as well?
Obi Wan, I mean oldberkeley,
You have done it again. I laughed at loud at your perfect analogy to our situation with COX and GTCB.
Dew,
Any chance that GTCB will make some kind of press release?
Any chance of GTCB getting a milestone payment for the human trial initiation?
Any chance GTCB could get a loan from Pharmathene?
Any chance that GTCB has a clue about finances? (Sorry about this last one but I couldn't resist)
Vinny
oldberkeley,
Thanks for making me laugh again with another of your great cartoons.
I don't think cutting costs would be considered a negative for GTCB when the amount of cash on hand is a major issue. Newbury is full of crap when he just says GTCB will not run out of money but doesn't talk about beign concerned about finances or that cost cutting is being considered as a stop gap measure. The shame of it is that GTCB should have done it at the beginning of 2008. Just imagine if GTCB had $5 million more on hand now, or negotiated $5 million more in up front money from OVA on the US rights to rATIII.
If Cox announced he was taking his salary only in stock for the next year, and cut other top excutives salaries by dropping cash payments in exchange for stock equivalents, they could save several million dollars to solidify the company's cash position and send a strong message of confidence in GTCB.
GTCB needed for quite sometime, and still needs to say, they are cutting costs. It could be 25%, 10%, 5% or even a trival 1%, but announce they are cutting costs. It would help perceptions greatly if Cox just said he was suspending his salary until a new deal is reached. If he isn't willing to do that, then accept some or all of his salary in GTCB shares.
Flo,
Good to start seeing you post again. I guess things have settled down for you, as you start with the follow up for your wife. I did get your email and am glad you are moving forward as best you can with what needs to be done.
Best of Luck.
Vinny
What does GE have to do with the patent that go seek posted?
Not much money to be had if you were forced to sell GTCB on a margin call.
Here is a good one that Oldberkeley previously posted
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=29202262
Yes GTCB it is likely that could get some money from partners.
Yes, GTCB should now be paying a good part of the salaries of their high level executives in stock until the finances recover.
Goldman needed a hell of a lot of cash and had a hell of a lot of debt, toxic and otherwise, which threatened to collapse the company. There is no way to compare that situation to GTCB, which only needs a small amount to keep going until some material positive events occur. It would be pocket change to many, but the cost will be steep to GTCB, which is why I would expect an attempt to raise only minor amounts of cash, if that is the route they choose to take.
I still don't understand why Cox hasn't done anything to slow cash burn, including the aforementioned payign executives in salries, or slahsing his own salary. spending.
John,
Why do you write such crap when everyone is nervous due to the major drop of the stock market? Money can be had, even by GTCB. It is the terms that are critical.
You tell them Lew. I am pleased that GTCB finally had an up day, but in the big picture it is pretty meaningless. I guess doofus and ductile are in the group spreading fear that we are entering the great depression 2.
Hey ductile,
Why don't you go duct yourself?
Dew,
I am not that well versed in word origins. Doofi sounded more sophisticated than doofuses.
doofus_king,
Thanks for living up to your name. You really are the king of the doofi!
So you think that is what is happening now with the emergence of the sky is falling gloom and doom crowd?
Dew,
It may be BS, but it is our BS.
Vinny
P.S. Any news about Flo?
<.... but I will take 95 cents anytime.>
Didn't you post this a few days ago? Are you going to keep repeating it every few days? I still spit on $0.95.
<1 month later, you may bet for it.>
I have already bet on it by investing in GTCB. You have made the same bet. What are you talking about?
I spit on $0.95!