To: Jan A. Van Hummel who wrote (7543 ) 12/20/1997 7:59:00 AM From: Jerry in Omaha Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 20681
Mr. Van Hummel; You posted; "Reporting news for the sake of having to report news is more harmful IMHO than reporting news when there is news to be reported." I did not intend to suggest that we move to a regular news hand-out. I simply asked for an improvement in the quality and quantity of truthful, timely, relevant information. I want information not only handled properly by this company I want them to excel at it! Is there anyone out there who will argue that excellence is now the status quo? Maybe we have reason to suspect not. If Mr. Lett joined our fourm merely to counter-weight the hyper-enthusiastic Mr. liontamer, or Mr. liontamer was pressured in any way to stop posting that would tend to indicate that we are being sandbagged for one reason or another. Information may be being witheld from small investors and the general public. This would constitute a serious situation which would have to be addressed. (Note: I am not suggesting that this is the case, just that it could be.) It is my hope that immediate serious attention will be given to the status of Naxos' overall public relations strategy. Hazarding a guess, I suspect that a high priority classification has not been applied. If this company has what it claims it better be damn good at claiming what it has , not just from the scientific proof aspect, verifying our claims, but what it all is going to mean to the world at large. Our news flow should be the prompt dissemination of truthful information regarding actions taken and not taken by the company, coupled to accurate official explanations by the company; thorough and timely. We are no longer the beseiged but about to beseige the world with news of a most startling nature. Let's give thoughtful, serious consideration how we go about it. Jerard P