I have yet to see or hear independent evidence of the situation you describe
Charlie:
First, what "situation" are you referring to? What Pat has done is merely act as a conduit to what is clearly verifiable information.
As far Pat providing a link to & quoting from an SEC filing, what more independent, conclusive evidence could you want?
As far as her notes from the conference call, this is her personal knowledge of the call, which is certainly more creditworthy than anything else we've heard. If, in-fact, her statements were false, I would tend to think we would have heard statements to the contrary here & all over the Internet. All we've heard is silence. We've absolutely nada from the horse's mouth, the TERN officer from whom Pat attibuted the statement regarding receipt of waivers from Rogers Communications.
I think any reasonable, rational person would conclude by now that the information provided by Pat is accurate & trustworthy. It has been subject to universal challenge for almost a week now, and no one has stepped forward with contradictory information. Just like a jury in a trial proceeding, at some point you must weigh the evidence presented and come to a conclusion of fact.
I suggest that if you don't find Pat's notes from the conference call very trustworthy, you seek out a more verifiable source, a tape of the conference call itself -- if TERN will make it available. Good luck. |
