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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Randall Knight who wrote (71842)	5/13/2000 12:09:00 PM
From: saukriver	Respond to of 152472

I can't believe that such blatant misinformation would be allowed to appear in the WSJ without further analysis. Of course, I'm still an idealist. To the contrary, I would hope the WSJ would print the piece on the glories of TDMA by Rod Nelson, CTO of AWE. But I would hope it would also print a copy of w molloy's dissection of the arguments and synapses in that piece. Perhaps the two could be printed on the same page. If AWE will not authorize the piece from Rod Nelson to be printed, then the WSJ could just say that and give readers the website address where they can read it. Then, print WSJ's dissection. The shareholders of AWE read the arguments on both sides. Well, actually, is is more like desperate half-truths on AWE's side and arguments on w molloy's side. This is what I would like to see the WSJ do: AT&T Wireless' Chief Technology Officer posted at www._________.com/_____________ a response to George Gilder's article printed here on Monday, May 1. When asked by the WSJ for permission to reprint AT&T's response here, AT&T refused to authorize its republication. We are sorry for AT&T's decision. Here nevertheless is a response to AT&T's rebuttal to Mr. Gilder from w molloy that was posted on a Qualcomm message board at Silicon Investor: then print the full text of w molloy's response saukriver

To: Randall Knight who wrote (71842)	5/13/2000 11:01:00 PM
From: Stu R	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

I have no information on whether AWE will be responding in the WSJ and therefore do not know what its response will be. I was told that Nelson's rebuttal posted on the company's internal website came as a result of nervousness amongst AT & T employees that were planning on buying into the AWE IPO. I would like to see this discussion take place in a public forum and that is why I've posted it here. Do you think there is any way to tell from Nelson's statements whether the "blatant misinformation" he communicates is a result of his lack of knowledge and understanding or rather an attempt to deceive? If it is not an attempt to deceive, is this the information being passed along to Armstrong and Zeglis, and could they all be in the dark? Stu