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 : Ballard Power -world leader zero-emission PEM fuel cells -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sid Turtlman who wrote (2306)	4/10/1998 3:25:00 PM
From: Edward W. Richmond	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5827

Sid, it is kind of good to hear from a Ballard contrarian. Indeed, you did make some "interesting" statements, but you did stimulate indepth discussion. I have to respond to your point 2 to Hawkeye,".. surely it should have been easy to find examples of errors, yet despite my challenging you every time you made that accusation, you never came up with anything." I would suggest that one statement in post 1488 (December 18/97) could be considered suspect. You wrote, "My target price for the stock is single digits (US) within three years. I am a long term investor <G>." Certainly anyone taking your statement at face value would have missed out on an extraordinary investment opportunity unless you still believe that a realistic target price is less than $10. No offence intended, but I'm happy that I didn't accept your price target, especially when I sold some stock at $160.00 Canadian. Regards, Ed

To: Sid Turtlman who wrote (2306)	4/10/1998 3:28:00 PM
From: michael a. rowe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5827

Hey Sid your errors have be pointed out....but whenever anyone does that you just ignore them. One of your biggest errors would be selling ballard short at about 100$ canadian....but i guess you dont want to talk about that one either. mike

To: Sid Turtlman who wrote (2306)	4/10/1998 4:19:00 PM
From: Kayaker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5827

<<Your use of the word "another" implies I have been wrong about at least one other thing. With the hundreds of posts I made here last year when I had more time, surely it should have been easy to find examples of errors...> "wrong about at least one other thing"? Hey Sid, I'll show you two of your errors. No... wait, this is deja-vu all over again. You posted this same challenge at the end of message #1662 on Jan 7. I pointed out your mistakes in my messages #1675, 1677, and 1678. And what was your response? Nothing. You disappeared from the thread for 2 months. So at the risk of repeating myself, I'll try again. Mistake #1: In message #1662, you quoted a "carpoint" article stating that carbon dioxide emissions from the Toyota Prius are reduced by 90%. You used this statement to claim that fuel cells are "no cleaner". As I pointed out in message #1675, the original Newswire article states that the reductions are only "50 percent for carbon dioxide". You didn't do your homework on this one. Mistake #2: In message #1662, you concluded that a fuel cell car (running on gasoline) would get 50% better gas mileage and you state that "methanol may be somewhat more efficient, but not greatly so." As I pointed out in message #1678, according to the Wired article, "methanol... it's fuel economy, 2.5 times that of an ICE". Again, you didn't do your homework. So Sid, feel free to ignore this response to your latest challenge too. See you again in a couple of months... Bob