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 : Advanced Radio Telecom (ARTT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Richard Dunaven who wrote (547)	3/30/1999 9:55:00 PM
From: MangoBoy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1176

100% in agreement.

To: Richard Dunaven who wrote (547)	3/31/1999 1:48:00 AM
From: SteveG	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1176

<..The words "very hopeful" mean just that!!!..> Ahh, now cmon, Ric - haven't you been around the street long enough to know that within the confines of safe harbor, you'll never get anything more definitive than the standard and understood couched words like "optimistic", "comfortable" and "hopeful", occasionally with the added emphatic adjective "very"? That THIS is the word game the street knows and plays to allow CEOs and CFOs some protection from legal problems? And which in exchange for that protection, the street expects the word game rules to be followed. CLEARLY, his recent and repeated "guidance" was Q1. <..Credibility is not so much the issue as shareholder value...> Again, surely you know these are not distinct? What kind of value do you give the shareholders by playing political negotiation games using the street and at the expense of your credibility and stock price? <..If you were going to sell your house and gave yourself a deadline of April 1 but on 3/26 3 more people came to the table with better deals but maybe some contingencies attached then you would take the time to analyze all of your options and make the right decision. This case is no different and should be treated as such...> A) not the same at all. In your case, you offered NO compelling reason to maintain the "self-imposed" deadline. In ARTT's case, there is a major reason to deliver on the expectations you recently and arbitrarily set up. B) Is this what you heard, anyway? Last minute better deals? Not what I heard. Even IR today hemmed and hawed the hackneyed "crossing Ts and dotting I's", and trying to wriggle from previous guidance. This is exactly what this "safe harbor" language allows - a life raft that can rarely be used more than once in the respectable corners of the street. Sure ARTT shareholders should get the best deal possible. Are you telling me that there was not even the possibility or consideration of some better deal or terms 10 days ago? BS!! Since before the CC mgmt has been saying that there were "more options than ever before", and STILL chose to guide the street to a Q1 timeframe. How difficult would it have been for Harry to respond to Bo's CC question with a "while we are optimistic that we will be able to negotiate the most favorable deal possible for our shareholders by the end of the quarter, as you suggest, there in fact MAY be some 'slippage' of these negotiations into the 2nd Q." Or even to do so at ML two weeks ago? Are you telling me Hirsch is that clueless? That when offered the chance to extend his guidance even a little bit, he chose NOT to without any forethought? IMO (and others I talk to as well), Hirsch was either playing bs political games on the CC, or is just plain naive (naw I'll be harsher - just plain stupid) to not take the opportunity and allow some latitude in the funding guidance. Ignoring/replacing the understood safe harbor "couch" words like "hopeful" - Bo essentially asked him "funding announcement by first Q or now possibly into second quarter?" To which Hirsch replied "by first Q." What was the possible purpose of not allowing some expectation breathing room, unless he intended to give the impression it would be Q1? If he wants to guide to Q1, he says what he said. If he wants to even allow the possibilty of into Q2, he easily could and SHOULD have DONE that. It seems pretty clear his purpose was to play public political games with the negotiations at his credibility's expense. He INTENDED to make it seem like it was that close, when in fact, it wasn't. And BTW, I DID sell - stock at a profit earlier and the more aggressive option plays at almost break even. And irrespective of the piddly announcement this evening (they HAD to spin something, they were getting hounded on this), ARTT's CEO either intentionally mislead the street, or is a fool. And irrespective of whether we wind up with a "better" deal (we'll never know, will we?) either Hirsch's integrity or his competence is in question, and his credibility is damaged.