Re: From Ron...@fatwollit
in response to
by
Mosaic ImmunoEngineering is a nanotechnology-based immunotherapy company developing therapeutics and vaccines to positively impact the lives of patients and their families.
Message: Re: From Ron...@fatwollit
I gave you a thumb up for this post or better for Ron's post, with a little smile on my face, because it was in the middle of 2007, when I had some discussions with Ron here on the board. While he was demanding a "marketing campaign" at that time, I was pointing at the main issue with PTSC, which would not make it prudent to start a marketing campaign (which still remains until today):
The "investor's product" is not ready yet.
For this phrase I got a lot of negative responses (including Ron), but I'll repeat my post from 2007, as it shows, we are still in the similar situation with just one difference: the uncertainty of the J3 outcome has changed to the uncertainty of the USPTO. Because only if the patents get re-validated and the license money flows fast, RG can follow his strategy of further M&A activities and supporting these companies with the money from the MMP.
"posted on Jul 20, 07 06:22PM
No, Ron - the product isn't finished yet.
Again: If you want to bring a product to market (and there is nearly no difference in bringing a company to the investment market), the product has to be ready.
No buyer of a car wants to see any risk/award-ratio - he only wants to see AWARDS.
We all here know the story of Patriot in a depth no one "out there"; is willing to dive - and for them (= from the outside) Patriot today looks like a company without OWN revenue stream, with no products, with only five employees (not really knowing, what they are doing the whole day), dependend from a lawyer company (geez, urgghhh...;-))...) and at last: fighting with some of the biggest japanese companies about "old technology" invented in the 90ies - btw traded at the second worst exchange in the US...
No wonder, for them even 240mio market cap is way too much.
I can tell you, I talked with a lot of highly intelligent and business experienced people about Patriot - the answer always was the same: "too much risk" (whatever they understood with risk).
Coming back to the "product isn't finished yet"-sentence and your "iphone"-example:
Apple owns a strong brand with a strong promise, which they keep with nearly every product they sell (as a communications guy I'm of course addicted to Apple...) - they announce the "iphone" and everyone knows, what he will get, when he buys it.
Besides Patriot isn't a brand like Apple and thus you cannot compare them, the "Patriot product" lacks of some important "product features":
- reliable, growing and predictable (= what is the price for one license) revenue streams from different sources
- win of the trial
- convincing strategy for the next 3-5 years
- etc.
I'll repeat myself: WE know, what will/can happen (one of the reason I bought another bunch of shares today before the news came out), but you can't tell the whole picture to "normal" investors - not with regular communication tools and not with the KISS-analogy (keep it simple and stupid).
Not until the cake is baken and presentable.
And: according to my business experience it's normal, lawyers and marketing people have different opinions regarding perfect communications - I don't want a lawyer to do my business...;-)
Good night to all!"
6 Recommendations
Loading...
Loading...
New Message
Please
login
to post a reply