No Chertoff is not just a lawyer or a judge any longer. He is The Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, the second most powerful position in the United Statesof America. He has direct impact of what does and doesn't get done in in the spending of funds in areas of homeland security. Those funds are expected to soar in the next decade. There can be endless debate to what technology is the best. However, if Bill Gates or Steve Balmer stated that the best that Microsoft was about to invest in a technology that only one company made--I'd invest in that company. If Walmart decided to sell the widgets of a company and stated that those widgets are among the best out there because they do this or that that other widgets don't, I'd invest in that company. Now Michael Chertoff who is a decision maker for the most powerful money machine in the world (the US Govt) has stated that backscatter is a technology that the government must implement in its quest for better security. AS&E has about 95% of all patents in backscatter. Guess what stock I am going to continue to buy?
Please note that I agreed with your assessment of asei for the most part. Your criticism of my message is motivated by your exception to my characterization of Chertoff...I share your conviction that sales are coming. I share your conviction that, for the most part, the products are good ones....I am simply trying to add a little 'trap door thought' (an I am painfully familiar with this sort of thing after a career working with the Pentagon), to wit: government purchasing of the cargo inspection devices MAY BE later affected by revisions in their assessment. (And Chertoff is relying completely on advice of others in his pronounecements of their efficacy. He is a lawyer and a judge by training and temperament. He is not a scientist.) I continue to hold this stock!
Burt, I see your point but in my mind I think the skill set of a lawyer/judge would be very advantageous in managing the bureaucracy for which he is responsible. I'm not certain of Fabiano's background (I don't think he is a scientist), but I think he's done a commendable job in streamlining production and promoting efficiencies. In my experience it's best to leave the scientists in the lab while allowing the "managers" to exercise their judgment based on flows of information. (I researched Fabiano's background a bit; I believe he's received awards for his strides for efficiency in his former position.) When they evaluate the BodySearch later this year, do you believe they will rely heavily on the testimony/input of the employees working with the equipment?