MATK (and Biowatch): The problem is establishing a value for them in light of a) The WSJ article assertions, and b) their forward revs/eps forecasts irrespective of the article in question.
Looking at FY Oct 2007 annual earnings, they appear a tad fully-valued for what they do, i.e., not a full-fledged biotech, per se.
The chart makes them look tempting; however, imo the chart is more reflective of where MATK should trade today vice where it was trading before.
(I've been wrong before and history has a way of repeating in that specific instance. It may be the UV rays damaging my eyes, as well as my facial epidermal layers)
BIOWATCH: on that note, did you notice that the sunscreen you referenced in msg #31786 is un-godly expensive?
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
