rotten:

" I was at the DC Demo and got the same treatment. The one thing that stands out in my mind is, I remember asking Chuck Bagely why they weren't working on VAMMP instead of ELF if that's where the money was? He gave me that all knowing smile, and said, "Who says we're not"? Well, we never heard anymore about VAMMP after that! Sorry to be so skeptical but I see a similarity in the answers you got."


Well rotten, does not every new coach promise to win? Of course they do. Does not every bank President promise profits? Of course they do.

The difference is "WHO" you are dealing with and how they produce.

If you met B&B and if you have met MP and JG, then you must be able to sense a bit of difference between the men.

It is very plain that you have spent time with all the above men. Which explains why you would make such a skeptical comment.

penny:

"As I posted earlier, I can't wait to see how this plays out."

It will play out just as it has over the last few years. You have been waiting to see CDEX fail, and all it has done is get bigger and better.

Not to worry, people like you can always find a negative to yak about, it is what you are about.

rotten:

Maybe you are a bit to simple.

Just take 5% of your savings and risk that.

Leave your house to your family.

wmft:

I agree on all accounts!

I met scared, he is a really good guy!

I have met all the CDEX people, they are "ALL" good people.

I have not met lmorovan, but I do believe that INET is telling it like it is!

ote

rottenapple:

And you being confused is something "NEW"?

diddy:

More like desperation, than frivolous, imho.

diddy:

Your post should be used to clarify just how different the two techs are.

The suit would be dropped tomorrow. IMHO, it will be anyway.

Please bare in mind, asd filed against cdex, not the other way around. Cdex is not looking at their tech as a similar science to ours, or a "better" science to ours.

It would be my gut feeling that asd has been looking at our stuff for a while. It is their conclusion that Cdex has a much better product, and that their stuff will be replaced by Cdex at a point down the line.

Thus, when the better faster car is seen coming, best try and hitch a ride, imho.

penny:

Did you ever figure out who actually was responsible for " the
Rudjar Boskovic Institute"? A little hint, who was on the board of Loch. DUH!

And you want to compare the bomb B&B show to the Valimed and Childrens hospitals?

Just how silly are you?

Do you feel silly?

What a brainy post you wrote!

penny:

"Where is your proof that cdex has a "better technology"? Surely in your massive research into the situation you've found the proof."

Where is the last place you would put technology that one is not sure of????????????????????????????????????


Hint below:





A CHILDREN"S HOSPITAL!

DUH!!!

wmft:

Well said, and I could not agree more!

ote

penny:

The suit will not be allowed, imho.

Lets see the CDEX response and see if you get a little light shed on the suit.

That is, if you are not able to read the patent that the suit is about.

What has happened is a company who cannot get their stuff going, is looking to hitch a ride with a company that is getting their stuff going.

What's to come is the suit will not be allowed and CDEX will continue to grow and Baxa will be selling, imho.

diddy:

What I know is that I am not worried in the least. That is "my" opinion. I pointed out the black and white that you and others cannot stand, and that is that someone thinks our tech is their tech, which means, whether it is revolutionary or breakthrough ( as if there is a difference ), someone cannot stand the fact that our stuff is going in places their stuff cannot!

Imho, this law suit has been anticipated for a while, and the appropiate action will be taken. Sometimes people just hope they can fire a shotgun blast up in the air and get something for nothing!

Imho, the lawsuit company is not thinking through the big picture. Just like a few others failed to do!

rottenapple:

Maybe some people know more than you think, imho.

doyourdd:

"The technology exposes target substances to an x-ray energy beam and then analyzes and compares the released fluorescent energy to a database of unique energy signatures of known substances. CDEX anticipates issuance of the patent in the spring of 2006.

“Protection of our intellectual property is a key part of our ongoing plan for growth," said Jim Griffin, president and CEO of CDEX. “We are pleased that the US Patent office has recognized the uniqueness of our technology.”

All current CDEX products, such as the ValiMed™ medication validation unit used by hospitals throughout the U.S., are based on applying the same underlying photoelectric technology for which the company has, in addition to this recently announced patent, four additional patents pending. CDEX has also filed corresponding international applications for each of these."

IMHO, asd is grasping at straws, while damaging CDEX with the filing of an unfounded lawsuit.

doyourdd:

I find it a bit funny that the naysayers have noticed that CDEX has someone who thinks has infringed on their patent.

It was the naysayers who yaked about how CDEX's patent(s) had nothing in them. Now, along comes a suit about patent infringement, and the naysayers jump at running down CDEX, while they forget that they claimed CDEX's patent(s) were nothing.

They talk out of both sides of their mouths, and cannot remember day to day what they have said.

Imho, this suit will be dismissed and CDEX will continue to grow and become a very successful company.

I have seen very view companies that have as much promise as CDEX has, come under attack and/or suit from a wanna be.

I have read both patents. I do believe that even diddy can see that the two patents have no common link. If ASD is not very careful, their suit could backfire, and they could pay damages to CDEX, imho.

nojoy987:

This is a CDEX board. Do you own over 1,000 shares of CDEX?

I do!

Only the honest ones would post if the owned over 1,000 shares. ( Not very practible )

If the dishonest ones won't to post, then they would just keep on doing what they have been doing.

Or maybe, you have to send a copy of your latest stock holdings, with your account number and other holdings blacked out, except for CDEX stock and your name and alias. (Good idea)! This would be sent to the board moderator, and he or she would let you on, or kick you off!

Why don't you just find a board where you can be appreciated and respected? A board where you have the desire to see that stock succeed. Where you can say positive things. And your negative points could be said in a constructive type, instead of a slander type.

doyourdd:

Yes, and I believe that our Tech will make it to the forefront of many.

Crow3:

WMFT is correct. You are starting to act like lmorovan. CDEX Inc is this board, not Loch, and not all the other stuff a few of you boys have said.

Crow3:

I believe the correct thing to say would be that we are suggesting to Matt, that a CDEX board should have "ONLY" cdex people on it.

I might add, that there should also be a restriction on top of being a CDEX shareholder, you must own a minimum 1,000 shares of stock.

Matt:

I agree 100% with Whitemanfromtown.

In order to stay on topic with a CDEX board, one should have to be a stock owner.

For someone who does not own stock in CDEX to be posting on this board is as off "TOPIC" as it gets.

Great idea WMFT!!!

Crow3:

He would be the one who FIRST HIRED the New York Law firm.

Matt:

The post I am asking diddy to put on this board could NOT BE more on topic.

It involves CDEX to the max.

I just got to your post, so I will be sure and do as you are asking.

The two post before this, posted by me, were before I read your request.

Truth is what needs to be posted, while we are posting on topic.

Xeno:

Your point is????

That because a post may be one year old, it never happened?

Or that you cannot be sued??

It matters not to me about time lines, it matters what he said!!!

Find another topic Xeno, this one is not about you.

Crow3:

This is why I know you are not honest, nor are you much at picking and knowing good people.

"I am equally sure that you know it to be a fake.

That is my take. Diddy can clarify whatever it is that he wishes to clarify.. I am butting out. I do not trust anything Lycos."

I know it to be for real, it is exactly as Diddy writes. The first part of it, that diddy does not want to post, has some of his twisted sayings in it. It IS EXACTLY diddy.

Diddy trust lycos, because he has more than once posted his email address, which is lycos!. The exact same email that is on the header of what he wrote!


"You probably had something in mind though, when you cited them,,"

Yes I did. All but one of the old post, showed Diddy blasting people's character, including Dr. Poteet. He claims he has not slandered or libeled people! Right!

One of the post I gave the number to, has one of diddy's twisted sayings in it. Which is also included in the top part of what he sent, and I have asked him to post.

Where do you get the private email stuff from? Did you make that up as well? There was no disclosure of anything being private about what diddy wrote. So don't even try that curb hugging tactic.

But, as I have typed this to you, you are probably someone who likes AB up in New York. These kind of people are just plain bad, imho.

Crow3:

I did not post the post to say Sactumdo was talking to diddy.

You are putting your wrong thoughts in again.

I know this is hard for you to follow, because you keep making mistakes.

The post I mentioned were on a different topic than my question concerning who ole Sac is.

Don't confuse the two as you have, their not related.

I wonder why diddy has not told us who sent the fake, and who the fake was sent to, and how he was able to use his email address?

diddy:

You best go back and read some of your post on Loch Long board, 220701, you are talking about Poteet and Blair being part of a scam. And you claim you have never attacked Dr. Poteet's character? 220744, "criminals stealing money". 220790, "Bible Thumpin" [Spit]. A very familiar ring diddy. 220767, and just more libel stuff.

Pretty amazing post, from someone who claims to have never slandered folks!

whitemanfromtown:

Yes it did.

He wrote it, and he knows he did.

Do you or anyone know who "Sactamundo" is?

I wonder if diddy knows who "Sactamundo" is?

diddy:

It is?
Who wrote the fake?
What was your email address with lycos?
Who did it go to?
What did the fake say?

tia

Scarednomore:

"There is a very long way to go and many good things can happen along the way as I believe there will be revenues as I have said."

Imho, the revenue stream is a given. We all read where Baxa is on the hook to buy x amount of units. The key stat imho, is whether Baxa will obtain orders for units above their quota.

With the patents that have been approved, and the others pending. I would say that additional orders are close for the homeland security products. You would not hire somone for that position, if you were not pretty sure you could generate sales in that area, imho.

You are alredy having to pay 12 to 20 cents more today than you could have bought CDEX a while back. My guess is, CDEX will continue a slight upward climb because of the forward looking statement made by the ceo. Stocks react to positive CEO statements with increased share price the closer the company gets to the time frame in which the CEO spoke about. With the CEO's news being positive for the future, I believe with each additional pr, the stock will continue to inch up.

By the time decent revenues are included in a filing, I believe the share price will be higher than it is today.



ote

scarednomore:

Have you bought any CDEX in the last 2 or 3 months?

Don't mean to be nosey, just wondering.

ote

Crow3:

Your baffling bs has caught you a long time ago.

Baxa, Patents, Hospitals, Profiles, and still growing.

The truth really tees you off.

Crow3:

You are not telling the truth, once again.

And before you ask it, yes, I have been to HQ numerous times!

Crow3:

Thanks

Crow3:

You never did like the truth.

You would rather throw your little dirty talk across this board.

You should be pretty tired of yourself by now, if you don't like bs!

It is just like your kind to scream bs, when you are as clueless as it gets!

Anyone:

Who wrote the post 9530,31,33,34 that were deleted?

Crow3:

Right is right.

diddy@lycos.com is the header from the sender.

Enough said!

sandpenny:

I have asked one person to post the rest of what he wrote. I have not asked you or any other person to beg for anything.

I have a strong belief that CDEX has the best stuff in its field.

No tactics needed penny, the facts are speaking quite plainly where CDEX is headed.

"Did you get forwarded an e-m he wtote someone else?"

Practice writing "wrote" 50 times.

Crow3:

Sorry charlie, what is in hand is the real McCoy!

It is you and a few others that concoct stories almost daily.

As was just witnessed in the last week or two.

crow3:

I never said he wrote me anything crow. You like to add stuff to your stories, don't you.

It is not about fear silly caw caw, if it were about that, I would have never asked diddy to post what he wrote.

Now, you sit there for a moment and find some other topic you want to discuss. You have butchered this topic to death, adding this and that. And I have corrected you.

What I have asked diddy to provide to this board does not concern you. If you are so bored with yourself, try and do a little research on LUV or USXP or DELL or ABZT. Or any other little stock your heart desires.

Crow3;

"copy of diddy's post on the ihub board."

This is referring to the post that diddy put on the board about talking with me last Friday night.

This has nothing to do with what he wrote, that I have asked him to post the top half of. I posted the bottom half, he needs to post the top half.

You just got yourself confused.