Profit motive is less than honorable and often interferes with
legitimate scientific inquiry.
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show
original | Remove | Report this message | Find messages by this author
Purdue University Cytometry Laboratories I use B-D
in this discussion as a paradigm for all flow manufacturers and
biotech companies.
Many of the arguments I've read on this network seem to reflect a
disdain for business in academia.
In other words,
the notion exists that a
profit motive is less than honorable
and often
interferes with legitimate scientific inquiry.
I contend that corporate profit is in the best interest of academic
science.
***********************************************************************************************************
*********************************************************************************************************
a tractor and other farm tools
From: Larry Seamer (la...@athena.unm.edu)
Date: Fri Jul 22 1994 - 15:12:34 EST
• Next message: Brian Hall: "Employment Opportunity"
• Previous message: Larry Seamer: "CD-ROM"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ attachment ]
________________________________________
The time has come the walrus said to speak of many things
of shoes and ships and sealling wax of cabbages and kings
of
why the B-D is giving not
and whether a tractor sings.
I finally feel philosophical enough to impose some of my thoughts
regarding the recent B-D software debate on my colleagues.
I use B-D
in this discussion as a paradigm for all flow manufacturers
and biotech companies.
Many of the arguments I've read on this network
seem to reflect a disdain for business in academia.
In other words,
the notion exists that a
profit motive is less than honorable
and often
interferes with legitimate scientific inquiry.
I contend that corporate profit is in the best interest of academic
science.
B-D makes money by selling cytometers,
not software.
Software sales can not support the overhead necessary to build the
hardware.
Every company tries to get a "leg-up" on their competition
with innovation, low price, more features, etc.
We are the
beneficiaries of this competition.
I concede B-D's point, giving away
their 'leg-up' will in the end be counterproductive to B-D
and to
those of us who rely on B-D.
If B-D does not make money, they go away
and we all build Cytomuts.
I am not very handy, so, this institution
would probably be flow-less if someone did not sell cytometers.
Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is fodder for future
discussions.
Many of us have been in this field long enough to remember when
our
monoclonal antibodies
were obtained by making them ourselves
or
begging them from colleagues.
Supplies of antibodies were limited,
quality was inconsistent, standardization was poor and support was
nonexistent.
Also, new antibodies were slow in appearing.
Thankfully, it is profitable to sell monoclonal antibodies
and the research which
requires them has flourished.
One final point on software.
As some have noted in past messages,
the best software has come from independent providers
(Verity, Phoenix, TrueFacts, TechTeam, etc).
If software is given away, it will no longer be feasible to sell it
and those who make a living by
providing us with innovative and useful software will go the way of
the Dodo.
We will be left with only those who are willing to give it
away or (B-D, Coulter and Ortho).
As those companies have argued,
they do not make money on software.
Therefore, it is unreasonable to think
that we can count on the flow manufacturers to meet our analysis
needs.
That leaves only our colleagues who are willing to give it
away as a source new software.
I hope the parallel to monoclonal
antibodies is apparent.
________________________________________
• Next message: Brian Hall: "Employment Opportunity"
• Previous message: Larry Seamer: "CD-ROM"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ attachment ]
________________________________________
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu Jan 01 2004 -
17:27:06 EST
**************************************************************************
Note from the Coordinator:
I'm pretty uncomfortable about using the list for business and
finance, even when it's related to cytometry, but I'm much more
uncomfortable about blocking messages.
I understand why people
object to messages such as this, and only ask that the list not
be consumed for the next month with complaints and arguments about
what people should or shouldn't post. I also ask that we try
to keep our focus on generating and disseminating knowledge
about cells and cytometry.
Steve
*******************************************************************************************
stock in Cytomation
From: bon...@FOUNDATION.SDSTATE.EDU
Date: Tue Aug 01 1995 - 08:46:59 EST
• Next message: /G=Gerhard/S=Nebe-von-Caron/OU=1890CHPE/
O=TMGB.URC/
@LANGATE.gb.sprint.com: "Re: DAPI/uptake of nucleic acid stains in
viable bacteria"
• Previous message: Thomas Delohery: "ISAC XVIII Abstracts"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ attachment ]
________________________________________
**************************************************************************
Note from the Coordinator:
I'm pretty uncomfortable about using the list for business and
finance, even when it's related to cytometry, but I'm much more
uncomfortable about blocking messages.
I understand why people
object to messages such as this, and only ask that the list not
be consumed for the next month with complaints and arguments about
what people should or shouldn't post. I also ask that we try
to keep our focus on generating and disseminating knowledge
about cells and cytometry.
Steve
***************************************************************************
As a courtesy to the flow community, I am posting this novel notice
of
interest on the flow newsgroups first.
I am pleased to offer 153,000 shares of Cytomation, Inc. for sale in
lots of
300 shares at $1.50 US per share plus transaction costs.
This is a unique opportunity to invest in the future of flow
cytometry.
However, I must caution that this is high risk stock and the
purchaser
must be able to absorb the loss of the total investment.
Having said that, if you are interested please contact me at:
bon...@foundation.sdstate.edu
Bonnie Lievan
Cytomation, Inc. founder
________________________________________
• Next message: /G=Gerhard/S=Nebe-von-Caron/OU=1890CHPE/
O=TMGB.URC/
@LANGATE.gb.sprint.com: "Re: DAPI/uptake of nucleic acid stains in
viable bacteria"
• Previous message: Thomas Delohery: "ISAC XVIII Abstracts"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ attachment ]
________________________________________
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu Jan 01 2004 -
17:30:35 EST
Cytomation stock
From: Donald E. Mosier (dmos...@scripps.edu)
Date: Wed Aug 02 1995 - 13:15:05 EST
• Next message: Mario Roederer: "GUS expression"
• Previous message: Marc Langweiler: "CAP checklist"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ attachment ]
________________________________________
Whatever the appropriateness of this posting
(I find it inappropriate),
it must be stated that this solicitation violates a host of Federal
Trade
Commission regulations,
and
that any responsible underwriter would have
blocked this transmission.
________________________________________
• Next message: Mario Roederer: "GUS expression"
• Previous message: Marc Langweiler: "CAP checklist"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ attachment ]
________________________________________
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu Jan 01 2004 -
17:30:35 EST