Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JRH who wrote (27706)	8/17/1999 11:14:00 PM
From: Techplayer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 77400

JRH, Ebbers is not Armstrong and Armstrong never pointed the finger at CSCO even though it was a failed CSCO switch. Ebbers is doing this knowing his own company was at fault. I have said it previously, but he claims to be looking at a blank slate for the upgrade now per all of the printed articles, meanwhile badmouthing LU despite LU's efforts around the clock to solve what was in part his own doing. Nice guy. I am in sales also, and having read this stuff, I was thinking that it would be difficult for me not to tell the guy what was on my mind. Brian

To: JRH who wrote (27706)	8/18/1999 9:23:00 AM
From: DownSouth	Respond to of 77400

Good point! If LU accepts responsibility, it can then take responsibility for solving the problem. The mistake LU made, if the reported facts are true, is that if knew what the problem was--WCOM had not done the install properly--LU should have said "Oops, our mistake, we think we know what went wrong, let us fix it, right now. If you know what the problem is, accept responsibility, the customer simply must give you the responsibility for fixing the problem. If you don't accept responsibility, the customer is not going to turn the system over to you. This is based on my own, personal, repeated experience.