<If it starts with me, then I ask that SteveG agree to a truce. Forgive and forget....>
I guess this is as close to an apology to me as Pat will ever muster.
And before the cheerhead weenies come seeping out of the woodwork with wild-eyed, rambling attacks, let's examine what I am talking about.
First, I will challenge ANYONE to find a post of mine which is inaccurate in it's criticism of anyone or anything (that, if wrong, I didn't already correct - whether on my own or after being corrected).
But what exactly do I feel that Pat owes me an apology for?
Well, as many may remember, when I posted the note that EricG recently referenced (which he completely misrepresented in his remarks - Message 1165135 ) about Pat having her flight and accomodations to Comnet comped by Amati, I honestly thought this was the case.
Pat never made secret in discussions with me her close affiliation to Amati. In fact, she frequently dropped Amati officer's names and details of regular conversations, as well as making statements like "I practically own the company".
So it didn't surprise me when a mutual acquaintance who owns a Cafe we both happened to eat at (and who was the one who originally put me in touch with Pat by phone) mentioned that Pat was going to an industry show "for" Amati. Pat herself gave me the impression of Amati wanting her there - to ask good questions and presumably to simply be her bright, peppy, supportive self. After reading that Pat said she had NOT been sponsored by Amati to go, I publically questioned it. I was wrong and admitted it immediately upon confirmation.
She asked at the time, why did I question it in public, versus asking her in private?
First of all, since she made the claim in public, it seemed appropriate to address in the same forum. But it the "story" is more involved.
So here it is - the (long) story of why I am unable to hold Pat Mudge with respect, let alone the reverance that the cheerheads here do.
-----
The first question of substance that I ever asked Pat before commencing in conversation about Amati was "are you married to this stock?". This is an understood term by people active in the markets to mean, was she sold out to the company or did she continue to *critically* evaluate her position.
When she hesitated to answer at first, I clarified - "would you be prepared to sell the stock tomorrow if you needed to" and "are you still critically evaluating the stock". She answered a definitive "Yes". I thought, OK, good, let's discuss details. I shared with her a number of the details that I had gathered in my due diligence, and asked her many questions. A number she answered, others she did not.
We exchanged email addresses, and began emailing. At this time, I had never heard of SI, and had only heard of Motley Fool, never having been on AOL. When AOL came up, she asked me if I had ever read Motley Fool, and I told her I stayed away from that kind of BS and hype. My pipeline was the network of brokers, traders and analysts at many of the major firms - that I had grown for 10 years - being a fulltime trader (and part time scientist). I never knew and she never told me of her personal involvement on MF.
In the first email, she sent me the EE Times article by Cioffi where he mentions the likelihood of a "minor" revision to the ADSL standard extending the upstream rate to 2Mbps. Well, I have acquaintances in this industry. One of them is the chief scientist at Pairgain. I forwarded this article for his opinion, and his response was that there was little to NO chance (his emphasis) of this passing standards for a number of reasons such as crosstalk and incompatibility issues.
I sent this response to Pat, and a few hours later (on Jan 22nd) I sent her another email asking her to neither quote George nor to use his name in any reference to this email. I clarified that this was because this was private email from George to me. I asked her, if she planned on questioning the company on this, if she could simply "paraphrase the perceived problems" as they were presented. I was concerned enough that this confidentiality not be breached, that I followed this up with a phone call and left voice mail to this effect for her on the evening of the 22nd, and asking her to return my call to verify she received my request. Not having heard from her, I called and spoke with her on the morning of the 23rd, and confirmed that she recieved my requests and that she would honor them. She agreed to this.
More email and discussions ensued, and she was always her bright, charming, generous and very AMTX-assured self. Over a month or so, it began to become clear to me that the murky details of exactly how and when Amati stood to get contracts, or even more public recognition, were not as inevitable as Pat's enthusiasm seemed to convey. I remember asking her about a CAP standard meeting, and receiving a somewhat curt/seemingly reactive response. And then it all began to fit. She was not an unbiased investor in a stock. She was really an "owner" of a company. I sold the shares I had previously bought, soon after (Mar 4th) around $14 1/2 - some flat, some at a loss.
Soon after, while research another company's name on Alta Vista, I found SI. Low and behold, I found AMTX and Pat Mudge. I read a number of posts, and posted a hello. Two weeks later, after reading a lot more and seeing that I was not the ONLY one influenced by Pat's extensive, "thorough", "plugged-in" and biased "reporting" on AMTX, I found a WSJ article which mentioned her and AOL-hyped stocks like Amati and Comparator. I posted the following:
techstocks.com
My next post was the above.
Her response was the following, which included an absolutely unfounded and incorrect assertion of my "shorting Amati again":
Message 1165666
The next post I made was the one referenced above which questioned her affiliation with the company. After reading Pat's response denying the truth of my post, and then being unable to confirm through our mutual contact these facts - and honestly being quite stunned that things were NOT as I had construed, I posted, sincerely, the following:
Message 1167576
To which Pat responded:
Message 1167883
to which I again responded, feeling badly about not being more careful:
Message 1168489
I also sent her an email apology, feeling it was the least I could do to make amends. She again accepted my apology.
My next post was 3 days later to Mad Bomber:
Message 1184283
Pat chose to respond, describing me as a liar, and attempting to impugn my motives for being critical:
Message 1185073
Message 1185099
My post:
Message 1185353
srvhap's:
Message 1186832
my next response (IMO, MORE than polite) addressing Pat's error:
Message 1186832
No response from Pat elicited this from me:
Message 1190158
The next two posts from me expressing my interest in simply asking respectful, critical questions:
Message 1190604
Message 1192090
And on it went, with NEVER an apology from Pat for HER lies about both my motives and intent.
Until about a month later, when going through the archives, I found this post from Pat, establishing her in my mind as completely dishonorable, interested ONLY in her "cause" (the overinvolved, overprotective mom protecting her soccer-kid/purse strings):
Message 715725
Go to the paragraph where she discusses Zimmerman. Notice the date?
(And note for hypocrisy, that although Pat criticized me for refering to our mutual acquaitance - who I have had many, regular face-to-face interactions and a few meals with - as a "friend", she has no problem refering to ME with that term.)
Any reasonable person bothering to read this far now has ample understanding of my less than cordial reaction to Pat. Combine that with the regular hounding by many of ANYONE who is more than mildly critical here.
And I again challenge anyone to find a post of mine that is inaccurate in it's criticism. How about the silly recent one where Pat PRETENDS she didn't see my posting of the Microsoft/ALA rollout, which launched one of her minions to "protect" her.
But then I would venture that many of you already knew a lot of this.
Trained as a scientist to be critical, and finding from over ten years of trading/investing experience in literally thousands of different stocks that being critical is the ONLY way to save your shirt, I will remain true to my disposition in my postings.
Regarding Pat, she still owes me a GREAT DEAL of apology. I doubt I would ever get it from her.
Recounting this obviously recalls the frustration and anger of being deceived. Dealing with hundreds of different brokers around the street, when an order is placed, one's word is ALL there is. One's word is the link of trust. Violate that and the business fails.
Good luck to everyone-
Back to a less empathic and more cooly critical (and cheeky, as appropriate) mode.
Steve
(no time to proofread and apologies for the bandwidth - probably my longest post. Further, I am gone until probably Sunday evening) |
