InvestorsHub Logo

nyt

Followers 26
Posts 12741
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 01/29/2011

nyt

Re: None

Friday, 10/10/2014 5:50:50 PM

Friday, October 10, 2014 5:50:50 PM

Post# of 131196
"the talk
about 10 years is nonsense. You can't be out there selling what you don't
have, until you have it. This company has only HAD something in hand, to
sell for less than a year. Not a lot of time at all."
...............

Not "nonsense" at all. The interpretation of the info is nonsense. The main point t about the 10 yrs was to show that the technology has been around for that long, so that the big dogs would've known all about it, inside out & upside down, long ago, in order to know if it was going to be needed as "foundational", which in turn, means that all this talk about "not enough time for these companies to have acted yet, is sheer nonsense. It gave a far better perspective than the more two dimensional points about how there hasn't been nearly enough time. What I said above (and spelled it out before, just like this) deems that argument as nonsense, clearly. And to cement that, even more, is the incessant claim that MS proved the value of LI, by their try for it. That is so shallow a view, when you consider that they did so 2 yrs after the fact, (incl their required prior art searches), AND THEN SINCE, LIKE FOR A YEAR NOW....HAVE NOT MANY ANY SERIOUS MOVE TO BUY...what you yourself, lol, lol, say they proved is so valuable. THAT seems NON-SENSICAL, imo.
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent VPLM News