To: Jon Tara who wrote (10823 ) 2/6/2000 7:23:00 PM From: PartyTime Respond to of 18366
[NOTE: This is addressed in part to you, Jon, and in part it's written generally.] Regarding my losses and my girlfriend's losses from that "other" stock--geez, I almost prefer to call it simply "that other stock." (LOL) But it's name was ZULU. That experience is why I gave up investing on OTC stocks. Sure I'm still in that ole' oil well, TRGC, from one of my first investments, but after ZULU I've stayed completely away from the OTC. I've done very well as a consequence. But I actually credit Jon Tara for helping to anchor this into my consciousness. You see, folks, JT is vehemently opposed to OTC stocks, in effect, he's one of the greatest champions against them. I don't believe he's here due to shorting motivations. I think he's a genuine critic. Very likely it is true that he was reading the EDIG article in the SD Union-Tribune and consequently visited this thread. Makes sense to me. And once he got here he obviously saw my posting. He and I had some whopper debates on the Zulu thread, where we argued about everything in and out of existence. A book could be written even. Perhaps he misses the good ole' point/counterpoint we once shared. By the way, in his prior post I think he meant "adversary" not "advicary," but perhaps a pun was intended. I almost sense in the present moment he seems to be baiting me back into debate. However, these days I don't have either the time or the desire to engage in a deep one-on-one battle. In the old days, I was carrying only ZULU and had lots of time. These days, I've got several important investments and my time is valuable in order to stay abreast. Regarding e.Digital? Hey, I don't view it as a penny stock trying to introduce a new pie-in-the-sky product like ZULU was allegedly putting forward. No, Edigital is an established corporation that's had some success in the past--I know this from my past transcription experience--but, quite simply, got blown out of the water by Sony technology. A lot of companies did, not just Norris. So, instead of getting its butt kicked, EDIG (then Norris) staged a retreat, cranked up the R&D capacity (emphasis on voice to text and text to voice), among other things, and came up with something which fits nicely into the technology times of the day. A smart move. Now, after its long hybernation, it's ready to reclaim its Nasdaq status and compete in the market with its new products and new and very sterling-like business partnerships. So what's the problem? Companies rise and fall all the time. Sometimes they're hot; sometimes they're not. Even Time-Warner, after its merger, required 10 years to recover. Look at what's happened to Disney, goig as low as 25. And what of Dell? Lucent even. The casebook is full of 'em. Read some Harvard Business Review case studies! Ya just gotta realize not every stock is a triple-digit decker. Some trade for years in the two to 10 dollar range and remain respectable companies. And that's sort of how I view the old Norris. It wasn't a blockbuster, but it's always been a viable company with a viable product in a viable market. Sure Norris wasn't Sony; but maybe the new and reinvigorated EDIG could be. Who knows? Finally, this much I know: EDIG is more than an OTC stock. Had I perceived it as such I never would have put my money up. And I don't think Jon Tara will be as diligent with his EDIG criticisms as he was with Zulu. Unless, of course, he simply wants another debating joust with PartyTime. No way, Jose! JT was right right on ZULU. But I definitely think he needs to discover much more than he knows presently about eDigital before moving on with a kind of criticism that could adversely affect future prospects of the company. He's got a great technical background, he lives in the same neigborhood where e.Digital is located and he has a primetime opportunity to learn more about it. He should. Jon, if you still like Calloway Golf and its business adjustments, you just might end up really loving e.Digital--LOL!