<<Speaking of words. I think I'm going to suggest to Dave that SI starts charging by the word.>>
LOL...Guess I will have to stop posting or go bankrupt <g>
<<Politely disagree, Ima. Look again. The wording, imvho, takes that next step across the proverbial line.>>
OK, I am doing more then just looking at sljb's and lbwr's disclaimer. I am looking at quite a few of them and sorry, but I disagree.....they ALL cross the 'proverbial line', including LBWR. Here is LBWRS disclaimer posted today :
-This press release contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Statements in this release that are forward-looking statements are based on current expectations and assumptions that are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, or other factors which may cause actual results, performance, or achievements of the company to be materially different from any future results, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Actual results could differ materially because of factors such as the effect of general economic and market conditions, entry into markets with vigorous competition, market acceptance of new products and services, continued acceptance of existing products and services, technological shifts, and delays in product development and related product release schedules, any of which may cause revenues and income to fall short of anticipated levels. All information in this release is as of the date of this release. The company undertakes no duty to update any forward-looking statement to conform the statement to actual results or changes in the company's expectations.-
Sorry creede, but this disclaimer says the exact same thing you are complaining about in sljb's...NOTHING is written in stone, nothing is guaranteed and the disclaimer is littered with the exact same wording you think is crossing the proverbial line....read this disclaimer...my gosh....it is no different then most micro disclaimers. LBWR is saying - NOTHING IS GUARANTEED, WE MAY MAKE IT, WE MAY NOT....They list a long list of things that MAY harm the company..they even say they they wont UPDATE any RESULTS or CHANGES.
<<But forget the disclaimer. Can you make an argument that would suggest that SLJB is shareholder friendly at this point in the drama?>>
No, and I am not attempting to. SLJB has alot of explaining to do, imo......I do not think I have ever said BUY SLJB or SLJB is NOT a scam.....It is a gamble, nothing more until it proves otherwise. Luckily a gamble I made a huge % gain on, but a gamble nonetheless, and I still hold some freebies well aware that it is likely it could fall to zero...and it could also run back to .20 just as easily. ANYTHING is possible in the casino....But, no, I would NOT say sljb is being shareholder friendly...then again, there are not many in this arena that I would call shareholder friendly...sure, maybe for this month...but how many 'shareholder friendly' companies turned out to be not so friendly? Alot, huh? Also, is that a 'key' for you? Granted it is a good 'key' and one we should all look for....but this is still the casino and I am looking at one of your 'shareholder friendly' companies that is down a rather large %, while this non shareholder friendly company ( sljb) has given gains that for LBWR to equal, LBWR would have to hit $12 a share from it's current .10 level- My point I think is obvious...this is the casino plain and simple.....your shareholder friendly company is down 50% while this 'scam' went up 12,000% and is still up over 1000% and for LBWR to have the same gains, we will need to see $12 a share. As RRuff said....only i'll change the wording<g>, ones man scam is anothers 20 bagger and one mans shareholder friendly guaranteed to go up company, is another mans 50 - 90% tax write off. PAVC, I would call very scammy....it gave 25,000% gains!! Of course it gave it all back, but that again proves my point...this is the casino, nothing more....and anything can happen......
But, I really would be curious to see why you seem to think LBWR's disclaimer is different then other micro's......I can break it down word for word if you like and show you how it implies the exact thing you say you are upset at seeing in sljb's disclaimer......But I suspect you are smart enough to read it yourself and see it is no different then other disclaimers.....
Well, glad I am getting alot of 'words in'. If dave wants to rid SI of me, all he has to do is charge by the word and I will be gone ;>)
And I am sure getting rid of me is probably on his holiday wish list this year <lol> |
