Seth,
If I were you I would try not to make too much of one word ( assume ). You see some of what you have written in your original post, reply # 1065 are forward looking statements either by the company, or you.
We all know the standard disclaimer that is included in press releases for forward looking statements. My use of the word “assume” should have no more of an evil connotation than any statement contained in your reply that was either forward looking, or not readily available to the public.
I would suggest to you then, if we “both” are to stick to absolute facts, we should “both” provide documentation of the facts we present. This should not include any hearsay, or any information that is not available to the public.
Again, I would “assume” that some of the information you presented in your original post # 1065, came from either your conclusions or from the company. However, there are some items of information that you claim are facts in your post, that are indeed not information that is available to the public as yet.
So if the words assume or opinion are included in any of my responses and you can refute them, by all means, do so.
Regarding, your request that I include all my responses in one post, that was not feasible because of the length of the post and the proper time to research an intelligent response.
All that said, I have deferred completing my response to your original post of item #s 8 – 26 for the moment. |
