Ron,
Sigh..., that's about the level of response I expected from you. But then, what else could you do but make a false show of bravado while running off to Vegas for the weekend, when your main point of contention that you've staked your credibility on turns out to be a very large pile of crap? It would have taken a big man to have admitted he was wrong... it's a shame you didn't make the grade.
At this point, I anxiously await (NOT!) your response. If you are going to grace us with a response, please, as I've stated before, post a link to some data that shows something to back up your contentions. You might try making an attempt at a substantive answer for once to any of the following...
-If my numbers are fantasy, why did LSI put them in their 10K?
-Why aren't pro forma numbers valid (you do know what pro forma numbers are, right...)? How else would you get an equivalent revenue figure to use as a basis for comparison in 1998?
-What are the equivalent earnings from 1998 for LSI/Symbios/SEEQ that you (and the ENTIRE INVESTMENT COMMUNITY...) are using as a base to grow 30%+ from?
-What are LSI's revenues going to be in 1999? Please give us the numbers that the "ENTIRE INVESTMENT COMMUNITY, ALL the covering analysts, all of Wall St., even LSI LOGIC" (your words and emphasis) are using?
Not to change the subject, but because I don't think you can do any of that with any credibility, I'd really like to hear from some of the other people reading this thread...(Diogeron, Big Sky, Steven Richard, Paul Lee, Wolf2, or anyone else) what do you think? Is my logic flawed? Shouldn't Ron provide some backing for his numbers to prove he's not just a Yahoo! poster wannabe?
DWB |
