InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 1
Posts 335
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 12/10/2003

Re: alj14 post# 8293

Monday, 09/06/2004 9:12:47 AM

Monday, September 06, 2004 9:12:47 AM

Post# of 341709
>> BTW, it's "recommend". <<

Sorry... been sick as a dog all weekend (flu) and didn't spell check wink

Regarding MVSN, I'm not saying they are the safer choice technology wise, I'm saying they are the safer choice COMPANY wise. No one could doubt MVSN will be around in five years, but the same can not be said for Sunncomm... so my point (repetitivly) was that we desperately need to address the corporate governance issues to increase our odds of being chosen.

I have not argued that Sunncomm's technology isn't better, in fact they've been very clever for an incredibly small company, but you have to comprehend that MVSN will now be developing nearly exactly what Sunncomm is offering, so our advantage there is temporary.

>> What counts now is that SCMI has stated quite clearly that when a second major label signs on for a full partnership, the whole procedure for moving on to a proper market will swing into action. <<

This is what I was told and understood as well, that is until I was told otherwise by management. I was told this is not a priority and that's what I have an issue with. When I believed as you, and still had confidence in management, I was happy to be patient and wait.

>> IMO, your delight in piling on the agony is really running away with you here. <<

I don't see how reasoned discussion constitutes "piling on" ?? My points are valid, there is a problem, and the share price is indicative of it... to argue otherwise is simply to be blinded by the dream (and Peter's sliver tongue).