To: Bob Davis who wrote (4818 ) 7/20/1998 3:30:00 PM From: David A. Irvine Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 8879
Bob, Good questions. I know the answer to some of them. I am not going to post those answers here. If you really want to know the answers to those questions then please call the company yourself. Ask for Gary. If you are so inclined, then post the responses, also. Agreed? You seem like a reasonable and intelligent person, but your post to Cheryl leaves me wonder about your intentions. Your previous posts on this thread about GLOW cannot be disputed. Specifically, you claim: "GLOW is a non-reporting company, there are 4,500 posts to this board, the company puts out press releases which promise such things as "Net profits...are projected to be substantial" without providing any specifics, posters on this board claim to have information from the company's management which has not received full and complete public disclosure, GLOW has a slick website, and retains an IR person on staff, there is no financial information available, and thus no way to assess GLOW's capabilities to carry out their announced plans." I agree that GLOW is a highly speculative play and, like most non-reporting BB stocks, has little public data, financial or otherwise. I don't think anybody can object to your previous specific claims because you are correct. You obviously have knowledge of and familiarity with the stock market - that is not in doubt. As an experienced investor, is it common for you to rely upon the DD of others to research a company? If so, you have no business writing a newsletter, although that is what is great about America - you can do anything you want (within reason)! I highly doubt you get your information from unknown third party sources. I bet you do a very fine job of researching companies. Why then did you ask Cheryl your five specific questions? Don't get me wrong, your questions are very good and I would love to know the answer to all of them! However, as an experienced investor, if I wanted to know the answers, I would ask the company and research them for myself. If I still could not get the answers I would evaluate my investment with the information I did have, and then decide what to do. The fact that you asked question in a public forum that you knew could not be answered in such a smug manner convinced me that you had an alternative agenda when posting the questions. I suspect that your true intentions were to attempt to discredit GLOW or Cheryl. If you truly were interested in the answers to your questions, then why didn't you call the company directly? If most people would ask those questions I would think little of it. However, I expected more from you. Respect takes a long time to earn, but can be lost in a moment. Just some words of advice from me to you, my friend. Taking the source into consideration, I inferred that you had an alternative agenda for posting your message. If I am right, then that is a shame. If you are trying to become a legitimate "source" for stock picks, you should be careful to refrain from such pettiness. If I am wrong, then please forgive me, but you should call the company to get your answers. Unfortunately, that is all we have to go on at the moment. I feel, as do many others, that the business developments of GLOW will mature into a profitable operation. I am willing to take that risk because I feel the upside potential is tremendous. I wish you the best of luck with your newsletter. Cheers, Dave