Thanks AEF, but why not discuss those valuable insights and conclusions. Not method of delivery. I call them as I see them. I discuss my ideas about the company as well as rebut what I consider flawed posts. How can one rebut issues without directly explaining why. How can one not cast aspirations on some of the ludicrous posts made here. Like the one who said I was wrong when I said we did not know how many shares GE had. His evidence. The filings would tell us. Posted pages and pages of Reg noise on that topic. They never showed the numbers timely and he quotes not from them but from the GE statements which I said would govern, not the filings. How about the ones who said GE would pay to get 100% or 90% and should pay 70 to 90 pps. How about the shout that GE had many unannounced orders when it has not taken delivery or used what it has already bought. How about the speculation that GE should give a lot of attention to the minority 15%. Except for process, GE does not owe anything to the minority. Arguably, anything that helps the 76%, helps the minority. All those posted regs only protect the minority in process issues, not necessarily in operational areas.
Bottom line, lets discuss the issues, positive and negative that are raised. Do you really think that in a through discussion one should not point out some of those outrageous opinions and if I am wrong feel free to show me why, not attack the tone of the rebuttal. But I will try to be more diplomatic if the points made are at least supported with reasoning and not just bald statements. I always explain why I opine as I do.
