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 : Fonix:Voice Recognition Product (FONX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mark Cox who wrote (1676)	2/21/1998 4:17:00 PM
From: Jerry String	Respond to of 3347

<<Jerry get of the thread unless you contribute something.>> The following from today's Barron's: <<Q: What do you have against talking to company managements? McCain: If you go out and visit a company, aside from climbing on the airplane, getting there, looking at one of 100 plants and talking to some guy -- most likely a stockholder-relations guy who is programmed to give you only what the company wants to give you -- what do you have? What we try to do is apply a rigorous quantitative approach to fundamental analysis. We ask the same kinds of questions of the data that any securities analyst would ask. But we ask those questions in exactly the same way, every day, every week, every month, over the last couple of business cycles, for every company in our database.>> interactive.wsj.com Can I stay now, MarkCox?

To: Mark Cox who wrote (1676)	2/21/1998 5:24:00 PM
From: Jerry String	Respond to of 3347

<<I was referring to the shorts negativity, somewhat closer to your own attitudes about fonix success.>> By definition, regarding the subject company and its stock price, a "short" is "negative". <<He's trapped me again and like many others am wasting everyones time with these stupid word games.>> This is a nice attempt at garnering some ad hominem sympathy, MarkCox. But I believe that you underestimate the intelligence of the average reader of this thread. It was, of course, I who made you waste everyone's time, I who sat at your keyboard and typed up your prior posts to this thread, I who help you wear the mask of impartiality while you attempt to chase away opposing opinion. MarkCox, you might consider blaming society for your inadequacies. It might bring more sympathy and understanding to your plight. Do you have that approach in your quiver yet? You are certainly a more clever wordsmith than I could ever be. But your feigned impartiality is not unnoticed on this thread. It is amusing to read such opening sentences as the following to Dr. Robert White from Post #1597: <<One of the things I find most difficult about fonix is having an positive opinion about its future, and not really having much to show why my feelings have been that way except circumstantial material.>> Well, now here's a guy who has an open mind, a guy who can see the facts before him. But wait a minute. The facts are only "circumstantial", he says. We all know that evidence is thrown out of court everyday on TV for being "circumstantial". Hey, wait a minute. MarkCox finished up this post by being bullish (as he finishes them all). With the blind bullishness that it's time to buy some more stock at these "low" levels! Hey, here's a guy who showed us in one post that he was negative on the stock and then changed right there before our eyes into a "bull". MarkCox, you are good!! Whatever they are paying you to post here, it is not enough!! You are right. You do not need a job. You have been entertaining 5 offers for some time. But, I agree, why accept any of them if you can collect for posting to this thread by doing what you do best? You are GOOD!!!