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 : Information Architects (IARC): E-Commerce & EIP -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Robert K. Sims who wrote (6487)	6/1/1998 9:29:00 AM
From: deltarider	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 10786

Robert, I don't think I am using scare tactics. I am presenting facts so everyone can make informed investment decisions. Obviously both publicly traded companies should have a moral and legal obligation to tell their shareholders what is going on. I fear it could be a serious problem if and only if, Micro Ingram is one of the first and only companies to actually receive, test, and implement the new code into its system. For whatever reason, I feel like the company definitely should have said something at the shareholder's meeting, the day the suit was filed. Facts change everyday, what may have been a great investment a day ago, 1 fact later, may change perspective and make it not a great investment later on. I feel there are some things that have changed my view of ALYD, some questions that need to be answered, some stepping up to the plate so to speak, for the disappointing return to the company's shareholders. 1. If the company guarantees their code, then how can it not work? 2. Anybody know the time from contract signing to implementation. How long does it take to get the code, fix it, test it, and implement it? How many companies have actually implemented the code? 3. Could it even be, (I am proposing this question as a theory for discussion, not even close to a suggestion) a possibility, that Alydaar could return code that upon testing looks great has no errors, but cannot be implemented. If I send Microsoft back Windows 95 for IBM/PC full of bugs, they send it back to me bug free, but in Apple format (bad example, but you get the point), could it be that Alydaar has a bunch of happy customers upon completion of testing, but a bunch of unhappy customers upon implementation? Remember Alydaar's SmartCode "manufactures" a new Year2000 compliant language. Thump9 In Alydaar's defense, obviously they wouldn't have filed suit if they didn't think they could win. Please don't attack, but discuss.