|
As a christian I deplore this kind of public character assassination in
any form, and sometimes, maybe foolishly, interject my comments into a
volatile situation.
I see no public character assassination. The question was polite and only reguired a simple answer.
Why did the criticizer assume that Mr. Johnsons comments were based on
rumor and not on fact and how did he arrive at that concusion? What
facts does he possess and how did he obtain them. Lets be fair!
Mr. Johnson stated in his report of September 22nd that he based his decision on the rumors from trade magazines.
I believe that we all lose credibility when we do not hold individuals
that criticize to the same standards as those they criticize. In my
opinion the person that criticized Mr. Johnson, lost his credibility
when he failed to post information about the source document, where it
is archived (URL), how he obtained it, and why specifically he disagrees
with it. In addition he led with an attack on Mr. Johnsons credibility
while at the same time asking for information.
I can assure you that in my letter to Mr. Johnson I posted his full report in its entirety. Also, I posted it on the regular Ascend thread my source and gave that source to Mr. Johnson. Mr. Johnson did not disagree this was his words nor did he state any part of the report was missing.
Look at the final email exchange:
Unfortunately RS&Co has a policy that prohibits the firm's research
analysts from corresponding with investors whom are not clients of the
firm.
Paul Johnson
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Glenn Rudolph [SMTP:grudolph@highwaygds.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 1997 3:10 PM
> To: Paul Johnson
> Subject: RE: your email
>
>
> Mr Johnson:
>
> I believe you changed the subject. I will answer your question but
> feel an
> answer to mine would be appropriate. I subscribe to both multinet and
> bloomberg.
>
> I am a reasonably large individual investor that does a great deal of
> research to make my investment and short term trading decisions. I
> have
> answered your questions and would you please answer mine?
>
> How much of a part did the Cisco AS5300 play in your downgrade of
> Ascend? That is all I am asking.
>
> Again, I thank you in advance.
>
> Glenn
>
>
> ----------
> >From: Paul Johnson <Paul_Johnson@rsco.com>
> >To: "'Glenn Rudolph'" <grudolph@highwaygds.net>
> >Subject: RE: your email
> >Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 10:05:58 -0700
> >
> >Why don't we start at the beginning of this relationship? Who are
> you?
> >And why should I care what you think? Are you a paying client of
> this
> >firm? How did you get my comments?
> >
> >The stock has been straight-up since I down-graded the stock. My
> impact
> >is minor, if not negative. I am not so sure that you should be that
> >worried about what I have to say.
> >
> >Paul Johnson
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Glenn Rudolph [SMTP:grudolph@highwaygds.net]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 1997 12:45 PM
> >> To: Paul Johnson
> >> Subject: Re: your email
> >>
> >>
> >> Dear Mr. Johnson:
> >>
> >> I did reread your reports. You expressed major concern regarding
> the
> >> earnings of Ascend due to a competing product by Cisco that you
> >> admittedly
> >> knew nothing about. Your only source of information was industry
> >> publications and you did not even state which publication those may
> >> be.
> >>
> >> You made it clear that the Cisco's AS5300 RAC was a real threat to
> >> Ascend.
> >> How did you come to that conclusion? You also downgraded Ascend
> based
> >> on
> >> increased competition of RACs manufactured by competitors.
> >>
> >> How much of a part did the Cisco AS5300 play in your downgrade of
> >> Ascend?
> >>
> >> You asked why I care what you have to say. The answer is simple.
> You
> >> and
> >> your firm are highly respected in the high tech investment sector.
> >> Your
> >> statements affect the market's reaction to the specific security in
> >> question. It would be difficult for me to give any credence to an
> >> upgrade or
> >> downgrade by you if you are using rumors only to make your
> decisions.
> >>
> >> I thank you in advance for your reply.
> >>
> >>
> >> Very truly yours,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Glenn D. Rudolph
> >> ----------
> >> >From: Paul Johnson <Paul_Johnson@rsco.com>
> >> >To: "'grudolph@highwaygds.net'" <grudolph@highwaygds.net>
> >> >Subject: your email
> >> >Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 09:24:26 -0700
> >> >
> >> >Why do you care what I have to say?
> >> >
> >> >You obviously have no idea what point I was trying to make. Read
> the
> >> >reports again and the point might become clear. Then we can
> discuss
> >> it.
> >> >
> >> >Paul Johnson
> >> >
> >
The source is in italics in the bold e-mail discussion.
Glenn
|
