Friday, December 22, 2017 1:31:03 PM
LMAO Talk about misdirection! I could give a rats gnat if Gordon Gecko was a shareholder here. Guilt by association is not guilt at all. You were the one to first cast aspersion on the legitimacy of Alpines Millitary contracts. I posted a link, and you conveniently ignored it. You are sidestepping the issue that you yourself brought up. Is it because it exposes the fact that you are not posting here in sincerity? So thanks to you I get to spread the linens out in the sunshine here. If you had clicked on the link I posted here is what you would see:
What do you see here? 2 of 66 government contracts between the Department of Defense and Alpine. Now I just saw another post you put up where you have clicked on the link and then cast doubt that this was a current contract because it was signed in 2015. So let me encourage you to take a second to read the entire table before sharing your penetrating analysis. If you read the contract info you will see it is a 2 year contract for $46,400. If you look under the completion date column, you will see that it is 2017. Thus it is a 2 year contract still in process, not as you attempt to imply a 2 year old contract. LOL
Am I right? Well lets see if the rest of the info corroborates what I'm saying. The contract right below it is a 4 year contract for $145,300. Aha! the smokine gun! It was signed in 2014, it must be a 3 year old contract being played off as current right? Sorry friend, this is a 4 year contract and the completion date says it will be completed in 2018.
These are 2 and 4 year contracts, which you can clearly read in the table. The "signing date" is not the same as when the contract ended. Look at the last table which for your great convenience is labelled "completion date"
The reader can see that you have a hard time comprehending tables on government websites. He might suss that your analysis of ADAC could be skewed in other ways as well.
The second part of DD stands for "Dilligence", as in don't give up, keep at it sparky. Try reading from left allll the waaaay tooo the riiiiight, first.
What do you see here? 2 of 66 government contracts between the Department of Defense and Alpine. Now I just saw another post you put up where you have clicked on the link and then cast doubt that this was a current contract because it was signed in 2015. So let me encourage you to take a second to read the entire table before sharing your penetrating analysis. If you read the contract info you will see it is a 2 year contract for $46,400. If you look under the completion date column, you will see that it is 2017. Thus it is a 2 year contract still in process, not as you attempt to imply a 2 year old contract. LOL
Am I right? Well lets see if the rest of the info corroborates what I'm saying. The contract right below it is a 4 year contract for $145,300. Aha! the smokine gun! It was signed in 2014, it must be a 3 year old contract being played off as current right? Sorry friend, this is a 4 year contract and the completion date says it will be completed in 2018.
These are 2 and 4 year contracts, which you can clearly read in the table. The "signing date" is not the same as when the contract ended. Look at the last table which for your great convenience is labelled "completion date"
The reader can see that you have a hard time comprehending tables on government websites. He might suss that your analysis of ADAC could be skewed in other ways as well.
The second part of DD stands for "Dilligence", as in don't give up, keep at it sparky. Try reading from left allll the waaaay tooo the riiiiight, first.
Join the InvestorsHub Community
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
