Tom,
Thanks for posting the URL for the article.
I must say , the man does not give up. The interesting thing is that
Canacaard used to be a big shorter of Naxos (by P. Brown) and the
rumor was that Baines was a media negative hypster for Brown.
I didn't realize that Canacaard and T. Hoare were related and that
a buy recommendation went out in September.
Anyway, I doubt that today's article has a significant effect on the
stockprice, as Baines has been writing these negative articles for
a long time and most people in the stock know about him.
On his behalf, I must say that there is much more incriminatory
information out there for him to use in his articles than
info that would tend to exonerate the desert dirts. Still, that doesnt
excuse the fact that he didn't really talk about Ledoux in the fashion
that he should have and didn't even mention yesterday's PR.
To Jerard: Sorry about the "ten foot" mistake. By the way, on MY
behalf, when I wrote that I didn't have the PR in front of me and
just copied what was in the text of the message I was responding to.
As I recall, that message only mentioned "10 ft" and not 160-165'
By the way, I am sorry that some people find attention to detail a nitpicky
complaint. You would never see Intel, Microsoft, GE,GM, or any
other major company issuing a press release giving ambiguous
information such as "Thursday , Jan 16." The reason for that
is because the potential for lawsuits is enormous and they need
to be wholly accurate. That is was precisely pisses me off about
Naxos. There seems to be a pervasive attitude that deemphasizes
accuracy but anomalously emphasizes precision (i.e. 0.954). It would
be much better if Naxos just reported the value as .95 but got the
date right at the end of the article. It is this seemingly uncaring
attitude that drives me crazy. Consistent quality is all that I ask for. |
