<..I don't think Trey is trying to spin anything about the CNBC thing...>
PB, your comments validate the need for further clarification (and you likely aren't alone):
First of all, CNBC DOES know the difference between EPS with and w/o non-recurring charges, and as well knows this is an important distinction to Wall St. I have, in fact, heard many such CNBC earnings report comments making this clear and important distinction.
Secondly, if by some chance they FAILED to specify this, trust that the street would not be confused, and that in NO uncertain terms, there would be NO misunderstanding (and for anyone such as Trey who thought otherwise, this would be a complete misunderstanding) of any "upside surprise" with the WSTL-AMTX one-time gain. If you care to review, this was my original clarifying point that Trey continues to try to make issue with.
Thirdly, the spin comment refered to more than just the CNBC misstatement. It refered to the whole of his post - the silly MU spin-control misrepresentations and the non-sequitor accusation that I haven't give adequate clarification of the issues.
Lastly (not that it matters, but), when was the last time you heard WSTL earnings reported on CNBC, anyway?
Now if by chance you STILL don't see this, there's really nothing more for me to say, PB.
<..i am hoping to get both pair and wstl on further tech panic...>
You may well be able to.
And good luck with all your investing
Steve |
