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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : 25,740' WINFIELD RANCH JV PARTNERS -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Harry who wrote (956)	3/18/1999 10:09:00 PM
From: Don Richards	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1326

Sorry Harry,I meant to respond to BB with this post,never noticed the mistake until the last minute!!....So:Hello BB; I just want to clarify something here a bit,being as you continue to expound on the pimple comparison!-It was not suggested by me that I thought that WTR would do poorly or stumble as a result of the lawsuit.Just where that suggestion came from I don't really know. What I did say was that it is my belief (mine only) that the lawsuit does not look very good on them and they would rather that it wasn't there. Certainly this may/may not be the case. My idea of WTR is that they are a good co.,so their business success in a rising oil market is to me both understandable and commendable.It shows they are a well perceived co.This is good. Also,I,in the past have worked for good co's. and if a lawsuit came up,it was not regarded as something that was desired but neither was it catastrophic in any way.Although I was just an employee,myself and others were not concerned about it because we had the confidence that it would be dealt with fairly and equitibly,which always happened.We never faced a lawsuit of very large proportions in relation to the size of the compay that I knew of,and this one certainly isn't that,I'm quite sure! On the contrary!-If this lawsuit was affecting a company negatively in these times,we would be in very bad shape,imho.,as that would imply it was a very weak and poorly percieved co.,which obviously isn't the case here! Basically,as far as I can tell,you are sending the message that you are right and I am wrong,which I don't quite agree with,because as far as I can see,in this instance,there is no right or wrong,just a couple of different perceptions!But let me concede!!-if you are right,how does that affect the speed of negotiations??!!Probably not at all!!-Just as would be the case if I was Right!! --Have a good one Bob!!-chat again.LP :))