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.

Strategies & Market Trends : ahhaha's ahs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solid who wrote (622)	12/17/2000 6:55:07 PM
From: ahhaha	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 24758

Why not alone or with another or others from the thread who may be able and willing to do so [gpowel, Grace?], arrange a meeting with Bell to discuss your insights and ideas as representatives of the SI community? Because they don't believe that we are qualified and they think what they're doing is right. If you just wait a little longer... If you would be willing to do so, we could ask for a post from any and all interested to cast a post stating that your visit will represent their interest. We could even ask for a public or private post to see how many shares we represent. They receive mutual fund managers so why not us? There is an elaborate procedure for challenging management. It requires a sizable portion of the minority interest. We could not convince a small portion of the minority interest to challenge management regardless of the collapse of the stock. Part of the problem is that little people wouldn't believe we are qualified. They'd want to see our MBAs and degrees from Stanford B-school just like Bell and clowns, so you won't make any headway with this plan. The little guy is little because they are more ignorant than the incompetents who run the company. The influence may be more persuasive if it included another forum such as RB or TMF. The strength, intelligence and wisdom of the individuals meeting them is the real persuasion though, not just mass. The only two people who have an idea about where the company should go is KB and me. Others are knowledgeable like gpowell, but he will be the first to tell you he doesn't have any recommendations about how to escape the quagmire. You don't really believe that these little kiddies and loud mouths on these boards could meet with execs and assert how the company should be directed. If you put these weaklings in that situation they would be saying, "yes, Mr. Bell, yes Mr. Bell". We are talking about making decisions about people's lives, tons of money, the need to be right, the need to have winning ideas about how to make money in a straight jacket. As soon as you get these amateurs involved you'd soon find out how fast they'd run away, especially when they saw that if they failed they could lose their own money and in quantities bigger than the stock market eats it. You couldn't stick these clowns in a professional position. You have to produce and last I checked, that's against the laws of fairness and the laws of appropriate entitlement. If nothing else, would you or anyone else be willing to articulate a multipoint plan of action that we could post, on the SI/RB/TMF threads along with a written letter to Mr. Bell and Mr. Armstrong? KB and I have done that. One source connected with the company doesn't want to take the steps initiating such a challenge. The employees and managers only want to show up and go through the motions pretending that everything will be ok. It's a job and they must try to hold on so that the checks keep coming. They know they're between a rock and hard place. They know they can't change anything. They can't see what to do. It takes a man with a vision and you won't get that with Bell engaging head hunters in order to procure "talent" appropriately entitled. Secondly, thanks for clearing me to post here. You never were not cleared except the first day when I was trying to learn how to operate the moderation module. In the interim you never tried to post. When you want something you go and take it. You won't get it any other way because if it's handed to you, you can't trust the strings attached. This philosophy is way beyond the weaklings that manage at ATHM. I only wish they worked for options only, no checks. Why, you couldn't retain any "talent" with such a scheme, and you'd be stuck with securing hackers and other undesirables like those who created Windows. Stockholders won't stand for such a thing. They're in for the long haul and they are satisfied with current efforts and current stock price. It could be lower so it must be ok.