TOM, I fully agree that Charlie has added a lot to this board and has given me new and important information. I've said so and appreciated it.
But as Charlie says, the purpose of this board is to agree/disagree as warranted, hopefully giving reasons and letting readers decide. I hope I've done that. I set forth my reasoning and ideas and others can agree or not. I'm still wondering what is different between Charlies GE will be happy with 14 8% for now and my statements that Charlie said GE would be happy with 14% or GE will accept the status quo for now. My thesis was that GE would not accept that level. Now you can accept/deny my thesis and reasoning but what was so bad with raising the issue and giving my opinion. Any insight??? Was my point flawed???
I have always tried to be respectful, offer reasons for my opinions, and do not attack or insult. Where have I been disrespectful to Charlie, Tom or others than saying I disagree and why. I have frequently complimented Charlie and others, and agreed with them or is it only evil when I explain why I disagree. In my opinion, replying to specific questions with extensive generic legalese is noise. Additionally, the term noise was accompanied by the LOL designation and what is bad with adding a little humor. Was the term noise in this context so bad??
Tom, where did I express contempt, character assassination, ad hominem attacks or contempt. I've tried to be only respectful and have provided reasoning when I agree or disagree and resent the accusations to the contrary. How did I attack anyone?. To sum up, I simply opined and reasoned why some posts were noise, why I do not think that GE will be happy with only 14%ish ownership, why the daily Elliot or other speculative story is not really an issue as we all expect Elliot to get to 10% by experiation date per their MO and why its inconsistent to attack others for non arcam specific posts and then do it yourself. Where have I attacked anyone and does anyone say the above points are not legitimate even if you disagree with them. Where did I attack, show contempt, obscure, reduce the clarity or do any of the other evil things that you accuses me of??? Please specify and i'll abjectly apologize but will continue to offer my two cents.
Tom, I take you veiled threat, and as moderator Charlie has the authority to stifle dissent and disagreement but I think he is a bigger man. I wish anyone would point out how I insulted, assassinated or showed contempt. I apologize for offending anyone. My goal has simply been to agree and disagree as I see it and explain why. That allows readers to pick the opinion they choose.
Finally, to sum up my issues at this juncture. I expect GE to get between 50% and 90% of the stock, am shocked that there ha been no counterbid or opposition except for posters here shouting for 600, expect Elliot to get 10% and play their game and I opine that no one KNOWS how many shares GE has or controls and we will not know till experiation date. It will be interesting to see what level of ownership GE accepts and if not 90% how arcam will trade thereafter. Are those opinions and my reasoning so evil???
