% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.


  • crossroads66 crossroads66 Dec 6, 2011 4:23 PM Flag

    Can Glaucus now be sued by Co. in a U.S. court?

    I wonder how this will play it out given CMED's rebuttal of earlier today, and its itemized responses to the allegations. I thought that when I was reading the alleged research report this morning that I was being reminded of matters that had been discussed and dealt with some years ago.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Yes, the company can sue. BUT, it will be tough to win anything. The company will say that they explained it was mostly conjecture based on their own analysis from information gathered. So...this is why companies like this are such a scam - they actually might find a fraud here and there - but they destroy the reputation of other companies along the way. And they couldn't care less because they make money doing it.

    • But it is more than that. I am still reading the report and I can't stop wondering how the facts can be distorted.
      For instance, those "analysts" are comparing on page 20, the gross margin of CMED which is a reagent kit supplier with medical devices manufacturers. How stupid can that be? A reagent is a mix of substances and support materials that reacts to stuff. It is not a machine. CMED rents for the free machines that are using the reagents. You can't compare a device manufacturer with a reagent supplier.

    • No need to sue them in court. People like Carson Block of Muddy Waters who makes dirty money like that always have to watch their back everyday and cannot live in the same house all the time for the obvious reason. They have chosen to make millions this way, but it comes with a dear cost.

      • 3 Replies to kchan9999
      • Meanwhile, Chinese officers who defrauded investors of billions continue to live in their dream home and laughing all the way to the bank! Longtop financial stole $1B from investors!!!!

        Why are you focused on punishing the messenger but not the source?

      • I would think the company has several options. For one, they could easily swoop up a good percentage of the float at these reduced levels, say a third or so, or make even a more dramatic move.

        Considering that what was alleged basically dealt with matters already dealt with and disclosed, this seems like another knock off attempt of Muddy Waters designed to help their short position.

        In response, a move like the one described above would certainly put a jolt in their morning coffee.

      • The company needs to be sued attacks and allegations of Chinese companies just because they are Chinese needs to stop. I wish Chinese companies would do a class action suit against these guys and hold them accountable for destroying companies. This needs to stop.

    • Sued in court? Fat chance.

      To sue in US court, the company will have to PRESENT evidence and officers will get SUBPEONED and have to SHOW UP in court. Do you really think the officers are fools enough to show up on US soil and they may be detained by SEC for questioning???

      I THINK NOT!

    • The Company maintains that the allegations set forth in the Glaucus Research report (the "Report") concern matters which have long been disclosed in the Company's annual reports and press releases, misrepresent the information they present and attribute motives to management that are based on innuendo and fail to take into account business and commercial considerations relevant to the matters discussed in the Report. The Company denies the allegations entirely.

      I have bought some shares at 2.59$