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 (9906)	5/13/1999 3:06:00 PM
From: Thomas L Nielsen	Respond to of 10072

<<<<<<< Good point. However, the data never lies. Joel never had data backing up his AOL trashing. I look behind Rocky at the links he posts and the underlying data he makes his reasoning from. I happen to agree that he has performed the correct reasoning in Iomega's case based on what he posts and my knowledge of the storage market. This doesn't meen I have to agree with everything he says on other stocks! >>>>>>> However, since this RR fellow(?) has continued this vendetta for several years, my opinion is that he is a troubled person. Someone that claims not to have a position in IOM but to have continued to bash for several years reflects that he has a hate of IOM. Most of RR's posts do not state the whole truth and many of them just bashing. IMO, other than being an annoyance for some, his posts have not affected the trading price of this stock. However RR has added spice to this thread and without his posts this thread might fade away. Tom

To: Ken Pomaranski who wrote (9906)	5/13/1999 4:59:00 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10072

Ken, Rocky may link to useful sites, but how is it that you seem unable to notice the low quality of reasoning contained in his posts, aside from a rather cavalier attitude to the facts? Could it be that you overlook these things because you agree with him? The Iomega bulls call him an enemy because they disagree with him. You call him a friend because you agree with him. Same fault, inverse result. I call him dishonest and uninformative. I call you rational, which is why I'm bothering to write this post.