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 : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim Mullens who wrote (53995)	5/6/2003 9:59:48 PM
From: pyslent	Respond to of 54805

Jim, Please re-read the AWE IR response that you posted... she's saying the same thing that I have been saying... "it [GPRS] is considered a next generation data network (2.5G), but not a 3G network... " AT&T never claimed that it was a "3G" network... just that it was "next generation". 3G is a standard. "Generation" is an english word. You won't even let AT&T call GPRS a "step," suggesting that it's only a "half step." Well they spent a lot of money building out the network and they have to sell it somehow... should they just say that the new network is "better"? or would you prefer "half better?" <g> All kidding aside, i really have no problem with AT&T marketing their new network as "next generation". I don't think it is intended to mislead and suggest "3G" as you seem to think, seeing as how the average wireless consumer doesn't have any idea what "3G" means anyhow. I think the campaign is intended to convey that the network is more evolved and has increased functionality compared to the old TDMA network. It's when they say "high speed" that I start to think false advertising.

To: Jim Mullens who wrote (53995)	5/6/2003 11:21:24 PM
From: Eric L	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

Correct Thinking or Lack of Same Jim, << So that we're all thinking correctly >> You are not, IMO, in a position to advise other investors here on "correct thinking." You are simply a blatant cheerleader for QCOM. You told us here several months ago that 85% of your tech equities were QCOM, and according to recent posts you have increased that, seeking "instant gratification" and an anticipated overnight appreciation from the thirties to $90 ought. My heart goes out to you. My personal reaction is that you would have been better off buying lottery tickets. Very few of your posts relate to "Gorilla Game" theory, which is what discussion on this thread is supposed to be about. Would you PLEASE get out the FM or RFM, and tighten up on that. Thanks very much for considering that request and considering ceasing your blatant, repetitive, monotonous, Qualcomm cheerleading, and adding more GG related substance to your future posts here.. TIA, - Eric -