Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.

Response Biomed Corp RPBIF

"Response Biomedical Corp is engaged in the research, development, commercialization and distribution of diagnostic technologies for the medical central-lab testing, point of care (POC) testing and on-site environmental testing markets."


GREY:RPBIF - Post by User

Bullboard Posts
Post by Hurting20on Dec 10, 2003 3:10pm
172 Views
Post# 6765111

2 year progress

2 year progressClearly the invesment community has ignored this so called progress. The investment community WILL support a stock with no sales as long as your business plan is progressing as PUBLICALLY laid out. Ballard is a perfect example. Support given to technology, but once their timelines were foiled the investment community dropped them like a hot potato. ie there return was in question The idea of a public co with no revenue is to raise capital to progress their business plan and rewarding those venture capitalist type investors with returns as the company gets closer to itw own revenue/profit. With RBM capital has been raise at far higher levels than where the stock has traded so their is no debate as to whether this is a good investment or not. Sales numbers are only the sole issue for a company IF IT HAS BURNT ITS BRIDGES on credibility. It necessarily works this way. I would suggest that if no further announcements with regards to sales happens soon, the only way to get back street crediblity is to put your money where your mouth is. Why would one debate that you would want the management of a start up/ little revenue co (especially when your look at shareholder equity) to hurt like hell financially if they tank. It is called aligning your interests, and it is what business owners try to do with management all the time. One should want Radvak et al to lose hundreds of thousands of dollars if they do not perform, otherwise again, they necessarily do not view the future as brightly as its investors. So advaita, why do you not support my position of management supporting their own company. Remember this isn't bell canada or ge, this is a decade old company that radvak has bought a house with gone on holidays probably drives a pretty nice car (maybe even on the company). In my opinion they aren't teh most business savy/talented guys around- just look at where the stock price is. I know it will be much higher when when when. You want to talk about the company then talk about it not pie in the sky crap, when will you question your return as this stock trades at near its all time low except for bankruptcy protection- by the way I see no problem with using the term bankruptcy unless you are some cubicle worker who cares more about semantics than the position of the company...weakness
Bullboard Posts