Andre, Hopefully I can answer some of your questions.
The remark to Thomas regarding the "Emily Post" comment was a reference to etiquette. I was perfectly aware of my obligations pertaining to the bet that I had made with Thomas. His need to remind me in a public forum was not necessary, a private e-mail although it too was not necessary, would have shown a little more etiquette, if not class.
I'm sure we will hear from Thomas on this subject, as he has already made a point of rebuffing my comment in an email. As you Andre have already pointed out, the point of the bet was not monetary, it was a matter of principle.
Thomas won, fair and square, and for that I congratulate him. It was a good bet. But like all things, in retrospect I had hinged my bet around several factors, all having to do with anticipation.
1) anticipating the acceptance of the S-1 being completed.
2) anticpating that investors would be hedging their investments in front of 4th quarter numbers.
3) that the Cyclone would have shipped production quantities.
4) that Adaptec was dead in the water for the foreseeable future.
There was also one other factor that came into play, that being my belief that small caps and subsequently the micro-cap sector would wake up in late May to early June.
Although I was correct in assuming some of these, it was the lack of the S-1 completion and the lackluster performance of the small/micro-cap sectors, that contributed the most to my not winning the wager.
I would be willing to bet that the next 3 months would have a different outcome, but I learn fast. Anticipating the completion of anything that has to do with government involvement would be foolish, as I can attest. So I would rather just congratulate Thomas, and allow him to believe that he is the better man, with the better stock.
RB |
