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.

Non-Tech : Iomega Thread without Iomega -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ken Pomaranski who wrote (8327)	3/16/1999 1:18:00 PM
From: Alan Rosen	Respond to of 10072

Get real! What a b.s. response to David's question. Personal attacks? Analysis is right for the wrong reasons? GEEEEZ, archcc

To: Ken Pomaranski who wrote (8327)	3/16/1999 1:35:00 PM
From: David Colvin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10072

Ken, Sorry for remembering my facts wrongly. You did, indeed, say +$0.02. Here is a link to that post. Message 7342775 This means, without putting any "whitehouse spin" on it, that you thought that jaz was responsible for $0.05 per share. I'll dredge that recent post up also if I have to. About your 'challenge': I'm not sure if I'll take it. The reason is that I could be proven to be 95% right, but the thread will harp on the 5%. It's really not worth my time and effort. If someone actually cared about my views, I might change my mind. But your intentions are to use it against me no matter what I say. I don't know about anyone else hear but I, for one, will not use it against you. I'm more interested in a general idea of where you "think" Iomega is going and in what direction in regards to revenues and net earnings per share, which will ultimately be an indicator of future Iomega stock prices. Ken, I'll make a deal with you. You post your estimates of both revenues and net earnings per share (with your rationale/assumptions) for both 1999 and 2000, and I will "let it all hang out", taking a similar big step and posting the very same thing with my rationale/assumptions. I don't know about you but I don't think I have to prove anything to any of the "faceless" people on this board or on all of the internet for that matter because they don't pay my bills. If it turns out I am wrong it won't be the first time....so what? When there are two opposing views, someone has to be wrong and someone has to be right. The wrong one, if he is mature and knows what is good for him, will learn from his mistakes and adjust his views accordingly. I'm in this game to make money, one way or the other, and am truly interested in what you think.......so have at it! Dave