okay TFN, so you acknowledge that it is a real article from the Wall Street Journal. So why would anyone seek to falsely discredit it or malign me simply b/c i posted something reputable which rebuts the obviously BS claim made earlier that UC owns 85% of the company.
he doesn't, but i guess if it serves to fuel the hype, it's okay?
50M attempted to falsely accuse me of posting it to deceive. i realize there is quite a circus surrounding this stock (which often happens w/a suped-up hype-a-thon P&D), but that should never give so-called "longs" free reign over a board.
somebody posted earlier that UC owned 85% - didn't have time to respond then & when happy hour kicked in, i searched for the post on OMNI's board to refute the false claim.
it is the supposed "long" reaction that is quite telling about the purported strength of this stock IMO.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
