<..That is not the best of languages to use on the thread...>
Jim -
The term blowhard (no need to veil the letters) is a perfectly acceptable English word denoting someone who figuratively "blows hard" ie., talks a lot and without a sense of fallibility.
The term I used was 'ignorant blowhard' - someone who continues to push the correctness of their point, even in the face of clarifying criticism, though they have been shown to be clearly wrong.
<..Steve, just who is the b***hard?..>
Let's see.
Who continued to claim that DES encryption was a dead technology, even though it was made very clear that every major data security firm uses some form of it, and that many have recent, as well as planned future, products based on it?
And who continued to claim that the non-recurring gain that WSTL gets from Amati would lead to an "upside earnings surprise", though in the acknowledged evaluation methods of Wall St., this was clarified to NOT be the case?
And who continued to justify their erroneous claim misrepresenting that MU in fact did NOT break out their non-recurring gains (because they misunderstood something they read from some poster on another thread - as if that would be an authoritive source if it WAS true), and when presented with direct evidence to the contrary (from MUs own homepage) continued to insist they were correct?
I could go, but don't see the need.
<..but that he just feels that some people might be affected by just the announced numbers..>
First, this isn't what he kept arguing.
Second, whether someone heard the numbers from CNBC, read them in a press release, or on the Dow Tape, they would ALL include a report of EPS "exclusive of one-time gains" (just as MOT was reported yesterday). ANYONE who would even KNOW what a consensus estimate is, such that they might buy because of the "upside surprise" would understand that "exclusive of gain" EPSs are given, and would likely hear that an EPS number which INCLUDES a non-recurring gain or charge is NOT what is compared with expected consensus EPS numbers.
Flat out, he was wrong about non-recurring charges creating "upside surprises", wrong about MU's use of what would clearly constitute criminal misrepresentaion, and on top of it all, ignorantly refused to either acknowledge his misstatements or even just drop the subject.
I can fully respect someone who makes mistakes. And I have no problem when someone states something adamantly as fact. But when someone is so clueless and weak of character, that in SPITE of multiple corrections to the contrary, they continue to twist and spin so that they can pretend they weren't wrong - that's pretty much a respect breaker for me.
<..It's not all black and white to me...>
I agree. Much in the market (as life) is not. But this doesn't excuse a sloppy, handwavy, anything goes approach to understanding the markets. In fact, that is exactly why there is such a VALUE in being CLEAR when something IS black and white. And in this case, non-recurring gains/losses are clearly NOT considered in evaluating the EPS relative to the consensus. Any statement to the contrary is blatantly false. Any attempt to justify is blatantly an "ignorant blowhard" spin.
You seem like a nice enough guy, PB, which is why I chose to take the time to make my point even more clear to you. Do you now see where he was both wrong initially, and was being completely asinine (which unfortunately seems to be a character pattern) in persisting? If not, I guess I have to give up with you as well.
<..Are you insinuating that Seaman's is sick bc of bad news coming?..>
In the case of a WSTL, no news is bad news. So yes, I'm suggesting that his leave of absence is likely not independent from the lack of WSTL contract news.
<. How different is WSTL's G.Lite from Aware's?..>
For one, since AFAIK, WSTL doesn't have any shipping DMT yet, WSTL's is CAP, while AWRE's is DMT.
Steve |
