Zeynoc, I understand what you are saying. I believe Implant has value, in particular its technology and its relationship with the TSA. Our debate if we want to call it that is how one looks at the pros I just mentioned and compares them to the cons -- enormous debt, compressed margins, a history of losing money. L-3 and others looking to grow through acquisitions have sophisticated, highly experienced M&A experts doing deep due diligence supported by bankers and other specialists. They aren't charities, they are cold bloodied businesspeople who will only buy at what they consider the right price. I believe someone on the board said that L-3's CEO in a recent conference call said the company was looking to make a few acquisitions in the $100-200 million range. One of the items any M&A function looks at is pricing of recent transactions in the industries in which they might make an acquisition. They'll look at Smiths acquisition of Morpho, OSI Systems acquisition of Ameican Science and Engineering and Harris Corp's sale of its aerostructures business to Albany International (I mention Harris because someone on the broad mentioned it recently) Smiths paid 2x revenue for Morpho. OSI Systems paid 2.5x revenue for AS&E. Harris sold its aerostructures business to Albany International for 2.7x revenue. The companies purchased were basically debt free and offered the acquirer a range of complementary products. Each had pros, each had cons, just like Implant. We can't spotlight, say, Morpho's cons and ignore Implant's. They're part of the formula M&A people look at. Now as I understand it, you and other board members believe that L-3 or whoever buys IMSC will pay from 5x revenue to 11x revenue (Percy's number). Meaning anywhere from $250 to $550 million. My question is, why? That's more than double at the bottom end what Smiths paid for Morpho. Yes, Morpho has warts. Implant too. Our fundamental disagreement lies here, my difficulty in seeing why any company would pay SUCH a premium for a debt burdened, money losing enterprise, despite its pluses, including the fact it's right now the best known independent ETD company standing. It makes no sense in my view. I don't want to get into it here, but a new negative factor has just surfaced over the last week which works against such a high value, Platinum Partners brush with the law. It merits a separate message. Bottom line, we disagree on value. We disagree on the process typical M&A experts use to value a possible acquisition. We don't disagree on the fact that Implant is for sale. I expect a sale will occur this week, since Platinum's agreement runs out on Thursday as I understand it. I I think it will be sold for under 25 cents a share, and those bidding the price up will be badly hurt. We shall see, and good luck to all Implant shareholders.
