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 : Ericsson overlook? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (2395)	12/11/1998 8:55:00 AM
From: DaveMG	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5390

Tero, Listen, I don't want to "run around" defending Qualcomm. I mean who am I? And it's a stupid activity. I'm not the one who said you are biased, although I think we all have our prejudices. Have you looked more closely into the Dataquest nummbers? Do you have other sources of data. I couldn't get on os@kieto, they didn't email my password after I registered and I'm too lazy to go back and do it again, so I don't really know what you said. Qualcomm issued a very carefully worded statement. You, in your infinite wisdom are saying they are not to be trusted. I have been following this company doggedly, and sometimes to my chagrin, for two years. One of the things they definitely are, and one of the qualities us shareholders have a lot of respect for, is honest. If you're going to go around passing yourself off as an expert, you now have the responsibility of going back into those numbers and making sure that they are correct. Dave PS..My apologies to those of you who are annoyed that this Q stuff keeps migrating over here. Sometimes I think the three threads might as well be combined into one. PS...

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (2395)	12/12/1998 4:26:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 5390

Tero, that's "Barefaced liars", not "Baldfaced liars". If you are going to refer to L M Ericsson people like that, you had best be truthful - they might claim that they are NOT bald-faced and therefore they have been libeled. The expression "Barefaced Liars" doesn't refer to whether they are hirsute, but to ... well, think of Bill Clinton telling the television cameras, biting his lip, how he has caused and suffered the greatest agony it is possible to suffer ... hurt to his family...the anguish, the pain. Bill would be suitable as an example of a barefaced liar. Look at his bare, innocent, who me? expression. That is barefaced. Wagging his finger, he looks straight at the world and says "I did not have sexual relations with that woman....Monica Lewinsky". That is big time barefaced. Which is not a judgement on whether he should or shouldn't have lied. Personally, I think nosey, pruriently drooling people SHOULD be lied to, whether they are relatives, 'friends', employers, voters or just Yankee-see, Wankee-do types. I'm not sure that inadvertent use of incorrect English is a defence in libel cases. Since it might be that L M Ericsson managers are seeking a world record for mendacity, they might be flattered that you recognize their achievements in deception. Having infinite wisdom, I know these things, Maurice [Apologies to those late to these comments as there has been some water under the bridge and one would need to be familiar with the preceding verbal history to make sense of or not be offended by the foregoing. If you are offended even knowing the history, then, I guess you should click on by and hope your day improves]