DNAprint Genomics (DNAG)

[Straw5]

W2P

afford others in this forum the opportunity to form a judgement as to your objectivity and independence as an observer.

I am not concerned with proving my objectivity. I am at the very least as objective as you are; even if our opinions differ. If you or anyone chooses the feel otherwise, so be it. I won't lose any sleep.

First of all, I am not going to summarize spook’s position for anyone “here,” since anyone “here” is just a few mouse clicks away from RB and they can read it themselves.

In regard to your challenge, limiting my response to JM Dutton is not possible, because the point of view expressed was not specifically about JM Dutton; it was in fact about “paid for research, in general.” The reason that the focus was on JM Dutton is obvious.

The point of view I am referring to was stated early on by spook and I would be very surprised if you missed it. It was that you can’t have real independent analysis of your company if you in fact pay the researcher to provide it. Furthermore, that a company that makes a living providing independent analysis will not be in business for long if they rarely issue buy ratings.

The series of paragraphs posted clearly show that these salient points have not been missed by the SEC and other organizations that have come together to address the potential issues. That was MY point.

The niche evolved to fill a justifiable need. The fact that Dutton founded or helped to found one of those organizations is encouraging, and certainly adds weight to your claim that the analysis of DNAP is on the level. However, the matter of “paid for research, in general” is certainly not closed; which is why “the most relevant point in the paragraph” is the one that I bolded to begin with (the “growing in legitimacy” one), because that is the one that addressed the point I was making.

Clearer now?