InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 10
Posts 4220
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/10/2003

Re: Gcbr post# 16666

Friday, 08/13/2004 9:55:33 AM

Friday, August 13, 2004 9:55:33 AM

Post# of 82595
Arch,

"...thats why DNAP was the ONLY company that
could turn around the LA investagation."

A small correction, DNAP was the only company that 'did' turn around the LA investigation..."

The assumption that other companies 'couldn't' have developed the same kind of test is not viable. Realize that large companies with multimillion dollar budgets have the valuable luxury of being able to do market research 'before' they embark on new programs. DNAP, on the other hand, was forced by their size and economic limitations to gamble on the potential market for their product and develop it in the hope that a market would develop for it. In retrospect it may not have been a successful bet. It it doubtful that, given the present published income figures, DNAWitness will achieve 'breakeven' status for many months to come. In other words they will not even get back the money they spent on the development of the product, let alone make a profit.

That, of course is the risk involved in developing a new company, and is one of the main reason that most new start-up companies fail.

regards,
frog