Vision Sciences

Quote


















Anonymous said:
Possibly something going on with Vision Sciences and Uroplasty. Could be wrong but just putting it out there
Click to expand...

You didn't even do basic homework.

I do not see how Uroplasty will be a fit with Vision Science. Their sales reps call points are ENT, GI & Bariatric Surgery & on the Urology side they partner Stryker. Plus they are into selling capital goods costing $40K per system.

How would selling a $65 lead set fit in their business?
 






Anonymous said:
You didn't even do basic homework.

I do not see how Uroplasty will be a fit with Vision Science. Their sales reps call points are ENT, GI & Bariatric Surgery & on the Urology side they partner Stryker. Plus they are into selling capital goods costing $40K per system.

How would selling a $65 lead set fit in their business?
Click to expand...

Vision science's stock is trading at about $1. Why would one dog want to buy another dog?

Vision Science is not making any money, just like Uroplasty has not in the last 20 years. Where do you think Vision Science is going to get the cash to buy Uroplasty, when they have only barely enough cash to last them three months.
 












Kind of a head-scratcher, in terms of this merger. 2 sub-par Co's, teaming up strange product offerings. Wonder if this is a way to cut some of the "dead weight" from the already non-performing UPI Sales Force?
 






Vision Science is losing about $7 million a year, and Uroplasty is losing about $6.5 million a year..........both are dogs. Neither company has made any money in 20+ years. Nice job RK.

Already two law firms have indicated that they plan to file class action suits against Uroplasty on behalf of its shareholders because they suspect there may have been some unsavory purpose behind this merger, or that there were some securities violation, or......well any number of unacceptable actions. I will leave it to the lawyers to explain that to us. Check it out here: http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=upi

Vision Science has 12 reps, Uroplasty has 45 reps. I would say the combined company has 12 too many reps, so those of you who are on DK's hit list better plan on brushing up your resume. You know who you are, so do not wait, but control your own destiny.

Those of you who remain, better learn very quickly how to sell very expensive capital equipment with a long sales cycle. I can tell you, not all of us are cutout to do that. So sayonara to a few more of us. By the time the dust settles, my guess is that half of us will not be around, some gone voluntarily, others involuntary........merry Christmas to ya'all.
 






Here is my prediction....

One year from the time the merger is completed, about 25 of us will not be here. Just watch, the big turnover will commence within about three months. Let us be honest, many of us, including the top reps, are not suited to sell a $40,000 piece of gizmo. It just isn't on our way of life. I sold some high price equipment in my earlier life, and I know I would not want to go back to it.
 






Please do all of us a favor and excuse yourself right away. We don't need any dead weight. Its all hands on deck my friend. You have zero information about anything and you're already making excuses. We don't need your negativity. Happy trails clown.
 






Anonymous said:
Please do all of us a favor and excuse yourself right away. We don't need any dead weight. Its all hands on deck my friend. You have zero information about anything and you're already making excuses. We don't need your negativity. Happy trails clown.
Click to expand...

When are you, and all the others who are drinking the same kool-aid as you, going to realize that RK is completely in this for himself!! He's cashing out as much cash from this ATM as he can get his hands on. He doesn't care if it's unethical or not as long as his pockets are lined with cash he's a happy man. Horrible leader, horrible businessman, and more importantly a horrible person!! The sooner you and everyone else around here figure this out the better, otherwise, go down with RK and his sinking ship. Happy trails to you, you kool-aid guzzling idiot!
 






Anonymous said:
Please do all of us a favor and excuse yourself right away. We don't need any dead weight. Its all hands on deck my friend. You have zero information about anything and you're already making excuses. We don't need your negativity. Happy trails clown.
Click to expand...

Good advice. Let us start with RK, the person who has the deadest weight of all. Now I wish he would do the honorable thing, follow your advice and hit the trails, the sooner the better.
 






Anonymous said:
Good advice. Let us start with RK, the person who has the deadest weight of all. Now I wish he would do the honorable thing, follow your advice and hit the trails, the sooner the better.
Click to expand...

RK....honorable thing...lol! He can't even spell honorable much less act honorably. Honor to him is finding a new way to fleece this company for another 20% raise while plummeting the stock price to a 52 week low. Now that's honor!!
 






Someone here stated that Rob Kill is a "[h]orrible leader, horrible businessman, and more importantly a horrible person!!"

According to Wikipedia: "Defamation—also calumny, vilification, and traducement—is the communication of a false statement that harms the reputation of an individual person, business, product, group, government, religion, or nation. Most jurisdictions allow legal action to deter various kinds of defamation and retaliate against groundless criticism. It is usually regarded as irrational unprovoked criticism which has little or no factual basis and can be compared to hate speech, which can also be taken to encompass discrimination against a particular organisation, individual, nation, corporation or other political, social, cultural or commercial entity which has often but not always been entrenched in the practitioner by old prejudices and xenophobia.

Under common law, to constitute defamation, a claim must generally be false and have been made to someone other than the person defamed. Some common law jurisdictions also distinguish between spoken defamation, called slander, and defamation in other media such as printed words or images, called libel."

You do realize when you post a message on here that your IP address is recorded, and retrievable? In other words, while you think that you are anonymous, you are not.
 






Anonymous said:
Someone here stated that Rob Kill is a "[h]orrible leader, horrible businessman, and more importantly a horrible person!!"

According to Wikipedia: "Defamation—also calumny, vilification, and traducement—is the communication of a false statement that harms the reputation of an individual person, business, product, group, government, religion, or nation. Most jurisdictions allow legal action to deter various kinds of defamation and retaliate against groundless criticism. It is usually regarded as irrational unprovoked criticism which has little or no factual basis and can be compared to hate speech, which can also be taken to encompass discrimination against a particular organisation, individual, nation, corporation or other political, social, cultural or commercial entity which has often but not always been entrenched in the practitioner by old prejudices and xenophobia.

Under common law, to constitute defamation, a claim must generally be false and have been made to someone other than the person defamed. Some common law jurisdictions also distinguish between spoken defamation, called slander, and defamation in other media such as printed words or images, called libel."

You do realize when you post a message on here that your IP address is recorded, and retrievable? In other words, while you think that you are anonymous, you are not.
Click to expand...

This from Cafepharma's privacy policy:
"We do not collect IP addresses of anonymous users, and seek to prevent our ability to determine whom you are when you post anonymously, or your exact location."

http://www.cafepharma.com/privacy
 












Anonymous said:
Someone here stated that Rob Kill is a "[h]orrible leader, horrible businessman, and more importantly a horrible person!!"

According to Wikipedia: "Defamation—also calumny, vilification, and traducement—is the communication of a false statement that harms the reputation of an individual person, business, product, group, government, religion, or nation. Most jurisdictions allow legal action to deter various kinds of defamation and retaliate against groundless criticism. It is usually regarded as irrational unprovoked criticism which has little or no factual basis and can be compared to hate speech, which can also be taken to encompass discrimination against a particular organisation, individual, nation, corporation or other political, social, cultural or commercial entity which has often but not always been entrenched in the practitioner by old prejudices and xenophobia.

Under common law, to constitute defamation, a claim must generally be false and have been made to someone other than the person defamed. Some common law jurisdictions also distinguish between spoken defamation, called slander, and defamation in other media such as printed words or images, called libel."

You do realize when you post a message on here that your IP address is recorded, and retrievable? In other words, while you think that you are anonymous, you are not.
Click to expand...

Someone here stated that "[w]hen you post a message on here that your IP address is recorded, and retrievable? In other words, while you think that you are anonymous, you are not."

IMO this person did not do his homework. Caferpharma, according to its privacy policy, does not collect IP addresses and goes out of its way to prevent its ability to determine the identity of anonymous posters.

Also, IMO if RK is offended by any of the posts, given that he is a "public figure," to win a law suit he would have to prove that the libel/slander was committed with ACTUAL MALICE by the poster (whom there is no way to identify). Can you imagine if this high standard of proof did not exist, how many libel/slander law suits there would be out there because some public figure, somewhere had his feelings hurt by some statements made by friend or foe. Without this almost impossible standard to meet, imagine what would happen to politicians in their normal course of their campaigns making derogatory remarks, or stating their unfavorable or offensive opinion about their opponents; or simply and deliberately using the opponents words in out-of-context to make the opponent appear to be a wimp or worse. Or what would happen to cable show pundits spewing their venom about public figures (politicians or others) not sharing their political, religious, business, leadership or economic philosophy?

Good luck in trying to prove actual malice.

According to Wikipedia: "In United States law, public figure is a term applied in the context of defamation actions (libel and slander) as well as invasion of privacy. A public figure (such as a politician, celebrity, or BUSINESS LEADER [my emphasis]) cannot base a lawsuit on incorrect harmful statements unless there is proof that the writer or publisher acted with actual malice (knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth). The burden of proof in defamation actions is higher in the case of a public figure."

Counselor, while I respect your position, IMO it looks like you did not do your homework, any first year lawyer, still wet behind his ears, would have done.

Care to rebut my opinion and my understanding of the situation. I am always willing to listen to and learn from counter arguments.
 






In the previous post, the poster stated, "Counselor, while I respect your position, IMO it looks like you did not do your homework, any first year lawyer, still wet behind his ears, would have done."

Did you consider an alternate hypothesis? That this person is very smart, and while he knew that he had no way to trace the poster or that the possibility of him filing a libel lawsuit was less than finding a snowball in hell, his purpose could have been simply to scare people from posting what RK may consider (i) unfavorable opinions about him (no matter how genuine you think they are) or (ii) discussions affecting the business you consider serious, but not to RK's liking?

Something to mull over! You should not jump to conclusions without consider all angles. For all I know there could be other angles to consider.
 












Anonymous said:
Someone here stated that "[w]hen you post a message on here that your IP address is recorded, and retrievable? In other words, while you think that you are anonymous, you are not."

IMO this person did not do his homework. Caferpharma, according to its privacy policy, does not collect IP addresses and goes out of its way to prevent its ability to determine the identity of anonymous posters.

Also, IMO if RK is offended by any of the posts, given that he is a "public figure," to win a law suit he would have to prove that the libel/slander was committed with ACTUAL MALICE by the poster (whom there is no way to identify). Can you imagine if this high standard of proof did not exist, how many libel/slander law suits there would be out there because some public figure, somewhere had his feelings hurt by some statements made by friend or foe. Without this almost impossible standard to meet, imagine what would happen to politicians in their normal course of their campaigns making derogatory remarks, or stating their unfavorable or offensive opinion about their opponents; or simply and deliberately using the opponents words in out-of-context to make the opponent appear to be a wimp or worse. Or what would happen to cable show pundits spewing their venom about public figures (politicians or others) not sharing their political, religious, business, leadership or economic philosophy?

Good luck in trying to prove actual malice.

According to Wikipedia: "In United States law, public figure is a term applied in the context of defamation actions (libel and slander) as well as invasion of privacy. A public figure (such as a politician, celebrity, or BUSINESS LEADER [my emphasis]) cannot base a lawsuit on incorrect harmful statements unless there is proof that the writer or publisher acted with actual malice (knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth). The burden of proof in defamation actions is higher in the case of a public figure."

Counselor, while I respect your position, IMO it looks like you did not do your homework, any first year lawyer, still wet behind his ears, would have done.

Care to rebut my opinion and my understanding of the situation. I am always willing to listen to and learn from counter arguments.
Click to expand...

CP does not in fact, collect IP addresses. However, they have the capability to do so, but would never breach that oath of responsibility to their users.
 






Top Bottom
Back
Quote