so is the thinking that there is only room for one co (presumably the oft touted A co.) in this *new and emerging* >> sector
i doubt they themselves want that responsibility let alone scrutiny
competition (real or perceived) is healthy due to very specific factors
i for one look forward to the A co. coming public >> and what comes to pass re: analyst scrutiny >> SS >> *investors* >> and of course how IPO is *handled* >> plus as a pubco >> they will finally have their own ihub board vs >> er >> borrowing time and space from the JBI board
and have we ever read the reason why A co gets a pass for 8+ years vs. JBI's >> less than half that time frame
to say nothing of those investors >> applauded on the A co. and *maligned* where JBI is concerned .. hmmmm odd stuff for a fact when viewed objectively
cue the sec post >> i wouldn't bother >> the A co. isn't public and the sec has no leg to stand on where JBI is concerned and while i've always advocated for a very *public* trial to expose cretinous filth >> i have also realized that JBI's senior mgmt will do what is best for LT investors and the co. >> which is why a negotiated settlement >> moves JBI to the next level and prevents exposure re: imo embarrassing aspects *sec* related re: *timing*
most investors in P2O/P2F >> know exactly what came to pass and why
=== 4kids all jmo
10/5/07 -- there are no coincidences here ... oh and like many other longs .. not selling at this level --