SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : C-Cube -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Rarebird who wrote (38695)1/29/1999 5:58:00 AM
From: SC  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 50808
 
Corrections and comments on Rarebird's <<China still might devalue. They are "pondering" it.>>

"Pondering" was the the word chosen by the same reporter, who had given the article an even more misleading title than "pondering" (which was still not very accurate characterization of the quoted comments of "China"). I have pointed this out after being "in the reading" of the details from the same article you posted here. You posted the article with only the [mis]title and the link, to which I responded with more detailed descriptive facts as reported INSIDE the same article.

<<Life is interpretation, Stockbug. It is all in the reading. >>

Interpretation far off the facts like this [or rather misleading and misinterpreting] should not be a reporter's job, even though some might think it could be profitable to repeat and highlight the misinterpretation (cut off from the more accurate facts) here time after time?

<<If the dollar rises to the level of last summer ( a possibility again ) China would be forced to devalue. Face the facts about Cube. >>

We will face the "facts" when they become true (could be sometime next year?). What about the same "fact" of the last summer when the dollar was at your desired level, and until today? Didn't someone last week quoted some "major guru" to us here along the similar party line of yours to say that China will devalue the money LAST Sunday? Was that a fact or a "fact"?