Data Race (NASDAQ: RACE) NEWS! 2 voice/data/fax: ONE LINE! Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Data Race (NASDAQ: RACE) NEWS! 2 voice/data/fax: ONE LINE!

RACE 383.01

-0.5%

Nov 26 3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Ignacio Mosqueira who wrote (26051)	11/25/1997 9:35:00 AM
From: drakes353	Read Replies (1) of 33268

Ignacio: Let us keep the game going as long as you want Drakes. As I said 20 million sales just for BT. Better than 40% margin. With other sources of rev this will mean about breakeven conservatively. That is barring any additional deals. We do not need them but it would be great if we got them. FWIW, you didn't say 20 million in sales you said 20 million. It wasn't clear as to what you meant so I asked for clarification. You're the one that's encouraging me to ask questions. You've eve admitted that some of your posts might not have been as clear as you intended. Sheesh. To wit: How 'bout AOL. That investment of yours is just a joke. Shorting race at 7 was a joke (let alone your 5 and 1/2 suggestion). At this time your shorts are a joke and your longs are a joke... LOL Let's recap some investment returns...... AOL +184.8% in 14 months RACE short I +32.9% in 5 months RACE short II +25.1% in 1 month If return like this are a joke then I'm laughing all the way to the bank. The internet will not become a business mainstream solution anytime soon. Oh boy. Betting against the internet has been a sure way to lose money. Well known names are rolling out because they do not want to be left out in the future. The reason why is extremely simple: it is NOT dependable. Man, someone better call that commuter college in Georgia and tell them they have made a huge mistake rolling out that 6,000 client VPN. What happens if there is trouble? Who you gonna call? Ghostbusters! Yep, you're right that's the biggest knock on using the interenet. Occasionally it coughs up a hairball. But that's where the cost benefit analysis comes into play. Have you heard of W3C? I hear Lee-Berners does not even have the time to deal with companies only with his vision. If it is free it is public and nobody is assuming responsibility for whatever can and does go wrong, otherwise there are fees. It is that simple. Sure it has business uses but it can not be the backbone of remote access at this time. End of story. For data only remote access? Why not? Because it's not 100% reliable? That's a reach. I can just picture Ben Barker cringing when he reads your harping as if he were unaware of the issues involved. Now when did I say Barker was unaware of anything? Come now there is no reason for you to stretch your credibility like that. It makes you look real bad. You're not trying to imply that there will be more BT clients deployed than VPN clients deployed any time in the near future are you? Now that would be a credibility stretch. drakes353

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next