>It's official. I got the official word yesterday in the mail from ASHA. I
>will try and get something typed up to share with everybody on the details.
>At this juncture I'm all for
>speculating as to the nature of the economic problems that swamped the
>poor company.
Here's my 2 cents below.
>Hard or impossible to open up new markets?
Sort of. I think it's related to the same ol' "awareness" thing that's
been herp's problem all along. It's a matter of getting the attention
of the medical community and making them realize that (1) herp is a
problem and that they (2) can do something about it. Most docs, and
others that matter, shrug it off as a minor issue not worthy of their
time. Especially since, they think, there's nothing to be done about
it anyway (aaarrgghh!!).
>Just not
>that much call for a while-u-wait herpes test that only finds HSV2?
If everyone, including the doctors, knew the facts about herpes,
instead of the misinformation and myths, and knew the tests were
available, the demand would be there. There's not a doubt in my mind
about that.
>No good pow wows by the Big Chiefs? Too many three martini power
>lunches?
I've met one of their spokespeeps. She's much more a serious medical
professional than a glitzy public relations type. I don't think a
bloated sales and advertising budget is the problem.
>I always thought the web site was not the most professionaly
>done.
Probably right. But I think the "POCKit-leaflet for doctors" is a
great idea as far as "bang for the buck" is concerned. But the general
public still isn't exposed to the web nearly as much as TV and print
media. If Diagnology had the money for TV ads like SKB has, they could
start getting the word out a lot faster.
>Is the Co. still operating in foreign lands? (apologies to the
>Irish for calling them foreign!)
Not sure why that ... other than, like most other U.S. companies, the
lower manufacturing costs are overseas. Everything I've bought lately,
from an American company, has been made in China or Mexico. Ireland is
a refreshing change. At least I can understand them (almost) when they
talk.
> this apparent setback could merely be a
>harbinger for the soon-to-be-rejuvinated Co. to stun us all with a
>Cure for everything from halitosis to overly mixed metaphors. <wg>
The mixed metaphors will, no doubt, be tougher.
>even if
>Diagnology can't cough up the bubble gum and bailing wire to hold it
>all together, they still ought to be able to sell the technology to
>someone who can.
Right. There's nothing wrong with the technology. It's a matter of
getting the doctors to think "POCKit" when a potential case of herpes
walks into the office. Right now, unfortunately, they don't even think
"herpes". And when they do, they think "can't do anything about that"
so "why bother testing for it"..
>Maybe we can take up a collection and go into
>bidness ourselves?
It'll only take three of us. I think if you and I and Bill Gates pool
our resources, we can fund an advertising budget that's up to the
challenge and we'll all get rich! Anybody else want in? The more the
merrier! <somebody call Bill>
>I nominate me for The Guy Who Mixes Up The Test Tubes!
SECOND!!
M2
M2slo2cht@Yahoo.com - 08 Jul 2003 14:33 GMT
On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 08:07:01 -0500, M2 wrote:
>If Diagnology had the money for TV ads like SKB has,
Oops! I mean like GSK has.
Sometimes you need a scorecard to keep up with the ups and downs of
the topsy turvey corporate world (and sometimes I simply come down
with a case of the dumb). The company that was once
Smith-Kline-Beecham has morphed once again. This time, into
Glaxo-Smith-Kline.
M2
I've started a new thread titled "POCkit no longer available" ... it's only
going to be a temporary thing ...
Hang In There,
~Angela
> >It's official. I got the official word yesterday in the mail from ASHA. I
> >will try and get something typed up to share with everybody on the details.
[quoted text clipped - 31 lines]
>
> Mike