no problem.. thanks.. here's a nice post from RB:
----------------------
By: skeptic23
Reply To: 2124 by Tonguehair
Friday, 30 Jul 1999 at 9:18 PM EDT
Post # of 2165
Everyone else has an opinion, so here's mine.
The company was sloppy, even a little misleading in their 7/28 PR regarding .17 earnings. I can chalk that up to mild deceptiveness or
to trying to spin things as positively as possible. Anyone care to define the line between the two? Not sure I can.
The fact that they went ahead and put their financials in public view ahead of schedule (the web posting was unplanned) shows me
that they are responsive to public reaction, and that they aren't trying to hide (in spite of the fact that Carl didn't return RKNRL's 3
phone calls--would you?) What's more, they never claimed that the .17 per share earnings were anything but the result of debt
restructuring. To quote from the 7/28 PR:
"The earnings per share are based on a weighted average shares outstanding of 30,798,039, and a restructuring of the company's
obligations."
I see a lot of reactions on this board prompted by expectations based on reading between those lines. DRGI never claimed their
earnings came from revenue. They could have said, "The earnings per share are based SOLELY on a weighted average... and a
restructuring of the company's obligations." That would have been more clear, wouldn't it? That earnings were a result of revenue
was an assumption that proved false, but it was our assumption.
So much for what it looks from where I sit. A big question remains, though, for me anyway.
(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long) |
