InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

martin33

09/08/12 2:15 PM

#22905 RE: Celtics2011 #22903


You could be right. Let them do one third of what they say and
all shareholders will do very well. Let's wait and see the size
of their contracts.
icon url

Black Beerd

09/08/12 4:04 PM

#22906 RE: Celtics2011 #22903

Your not really telling us that this in any way shape or form that this is to be compared to Dendreon? I played that and I am astutely aware that there were far and diverse and bigger dynamics at play than those projections. An Bio tech company in no way should be brought up as a comparison to a solar company. As for SLMU projections....unless you're an insider and knowledgeable of all insider dynamics and contracts you can't say that either. IMO...very irresponsible to think this should be a issue.
icon url

sunbits

09/09/12 3:59 PM

#22911 RE: Celtics2011 #22903

Herein lies the challenge for a management used to working in the OTC world in terms of how it operates in the NASDAQ sphere.

The same thing was seen at the Sunlogics Inc where I worked, where they regularly flaunted numbers of hundreds of millions of dollars in year two, and we all know how that worked out. I think they are just hitting $4M with no profits to speak of.

So I totally agree that for management to remain credible, they'll have to shed some old habits. Time will tell if they can do it or not.